ted@arsocomvax.socom.mil (Ted Nolan) (04/16/91)
Hello folks, I posted earlier about problems we were having using RARP with PC-NFS 3.5. It turns out that this is a known bug with 3.5, and you need to get a patched net.exe from Sun. One Sunnie was good enough to send me one, and it seems to resolve that problem fine. Ted Nolan ted@usasoc.soc.mil
leoh@hardy.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.190815.19911@usasoc.soc.mil> ted@usasoc.soc.mil (Ted Nolan) writes: >I posted earlier about problems we were having using RARP with PC-NFS 3.5. It >turns out that this is a known bug with 3.5, and you need to get a patched >net.exe from Sun. One Sunnie was good enough to send me one, and it seems >to resolve that problem fine. What can be done to make this more accessible? ... and do any of the 3.5 packages have the correct version of net.exe? (filesize/date stamp to check?). leoh@hdw.csd.harris.com Leo Hinds (305)973-5229 Gfx ... gfx ... :-) whfg orpnhfr V "ebg"grq zl fvtangher svyr lbh guvax V nz n creireg ?!!!!!!? ... znlor arkg gvzr
geoff@bodleian.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) (04/17/91)
Quoth ted@usasoc.soc.mil (Ted Nolan) (in <1991Apr15.190815.19911@usasoc.soc.mil>):
#
#Hello folks,
#
#I posted earlier about problems we were having using RARP with PC-NFS 3.5. It
#turns out that this is a known bug with 3.5, and you need to get a patched
#net.exe from Sun. One Sunnie was good enough to send me one, and it seems
#to resolve that problem fine.
A small note of administrivia. [Ted, I'm not getting at you, because
it was our fault we didn't make things clear.]
Several people got a little bent out of shape because the first they
heard of a patch was this posting of Ted's. The reason was simple: we
developed the fix, but before we made the information public we wanted
to verify that the fix actually worked in a network configuration other
than our lab. (We all know how representative a lab setup is, don't
we?) So we sent a copy to a couple of sites for field testing.
Unfortunately we didn't make clear to the people involved that they
should treat it as though it was a beta - i.e. no public discussion.
We're not being secretive or stuffy about this: after all, if the fix
had worked for Ted but not for XXX, and we'd had to go back to the
drawing board on it, Ted's posting would have provoked some people into
beating on our support folks for a patch that wasn't yet ready.
>Bzzzt!< Disconnect.
In future, I promise we'll try to be clearer about the status
of the fixes and patches we send out, and I hope people will
respect the level of confidentiality we ask for. If not, this
kind of informal field test will get strangled by red tape.....
And finally, on the fix in question: we're still awaiting final
confirmation from one test site. Until then, it isn't real. Really.
Geoff
-- Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Microsystems. (geoff@East.Sun.COM) --
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Sun Microsystems PC Distributed Systems ... --
-- ... soon to be a part of SunTech (stay tuned for details) --