martin@minster.UUCP (11/08/86)
In article <5255@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: >In article <41986@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: >>I think the most wonderful thing Sun could do is enhance NFS to support >>UNIX SEMANTICS. (You know, things like forced append, 4.2bsd flock, etc). > >system implementations. Perhaps then NFS-2 could support full UNIX >semantics on UNIX systems and emulate whatever it can on MS/DOS FULL Unix semantics MUST include proper access to devices as well as to files! If this means losing the state-less nature of NFS then so be it. (If NFS systems are so unreliable that this is a problem, I suggest they should get their act together on reliability, BEFORE they try to establish their systems as de-facto standards - the system I'm typing this on usually stays up for several months at a time, and then is normally brought down for PM, or such like, ie. on purpose) Despite the mess which System V release 3 has made of STREAMS (in comparison with the beautiful system (Streams - note the case) described by Richie), at least they got PROPER UNIX-FILESYSTEM symantics right! Now if only the licience wasn't silly... Martin
ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (11/12/86)
In article <596@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>, jqj@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (J Q Johnson) writes: > What distributed file system features do sophisticated users see as > important -- what features would you like to see added to NFS or to NFS > implementations? > What this user wants to see is the ability of NFS to function in a secure fashion accross communities of interest where you can't maintain a common user->uid mapping. -Ron
berger@datacube.UUCP (11/14/86)
I would like to see NFS help hide the brain damage of MS-DOS some more. Primarily some more automatic options for hiding the differences of text files in Unix and MS-DOS.
ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre) (11/14/86)
In article <465@brl-sem.ARPA> ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes: >In article <596@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>, jqj@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (J Q Johnson) writes: >> What distributed file system features do sophisticated users see as >> important -- what features would you like to see added to NFS or to NFS >> implementations? >> >What this user wants to see is the ability of NFS to function in >a secure fashion accross communities of interest where you can't >maintain a common user->uid mapping. > >-Ron Even the ability to export a file system read-only to certain 'untrusted' groups of machines would be welcome. (ie untrusted netgroups with machines where you can't control physical access to the machine.) Maybe release 4.0? -- - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. Internet: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu Phone: (412) 268-2847 [CMU-BUGS], 268-3275 Amateur Radio: KA3PLY (c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club)
capshaw@milano.UUCP (11/14/86)
The Pyramid implementation of NFS allows one to specify that a filesystem be exported read-only. We find it a natural and handy feature; for example, we have /usr/spool/news mounted read-only to a collection of Suns. -- Dave Capshaw