[illumos-Advocates] RTI: code review: 910 mountall thinks smbfs filesystems are local (and 911, 913)

[Garrett D'Amore]

RTI approved. :-)

	- Garrett

On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 00:15 -0400, Gordon Ross wrote:
> Hi Garrett,
> 
> Do you have time to take a look at this?
> I've taken the liberty of listing you as approver.
> 
> Attached: mail_msg.txt, Outgoing, PBchk.
> 
> There is copyright noise, as most of this work was from
> 2009 with only minor tweaks since, and I did not bother
> updating copyrights in those cases.
> 
> There are three change sets, one for each of:
>  910, 911, 913, to make life easier for down-sream
> projects that might want these individually.
> 
> There was elfchk noise in my previous build, now fixed
> by removing -lscf from mount/Makefile (a minor change
> made since what was code reviewed).  That shows up
> as a removal diff in this mail_msg.
> 
> Testing included using nfs and smbfs mounts in /etc/vfstab,
> and running mountall/umountall with various  options.
> 
> webrevs are here, if you want another look:
>   http://www.yalms.org/cr/
> 
> Thanks,
> Gordon
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Gordon Ross <gordon.w.ross at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:34 PM
> Subject: code review: 910 mountall thinks smbfs filesystems are local
> (and 911, 913)
> To: illumos-dev <developer at lists.illumos.org>
> 
> 
> Some more fixes from way back.  Please review:
> 
> 910 mountall thinks smbfs filesystems are local
> http://www.yalms.org/cr/webrev-910/
> 
> 911 smbfs mount command fails during system boot
> http://www.yalms.org/cr/webrev-911/
> 
> 913 dfshares returning failure (1) even when it should return success
> http://www.yalms.org/cr/webrev-913/
> 
> See note 2 on issue 911 for how to test 910/911.
> 
> Thanks,
> Gordon
> _______________________________________________
> Advocates mailing list
> Advocates at lists.illumos.org
> http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/advocates