[OpenAFS-devel] Re: [OpenAFS] Thinking about 1.6

[Alistair Ferguson]

Hi,

>>>  Since, as you note, there are sites which actually do rely on this, are you in fact meaning to say that the option would exist, but not be mentioned in the usage?  I guess I'd also like to hear from Steven on pthreaded-ubik.  It appears that it actually isn't 100% stable, but is close, and apparently it's issue(s) are difficult to provoke.
>>>       
>> What we have in the code base definitely has bugs; Are there fixes
>> which have not made it back upstream?
>>     
>
> Not significant fixes, no, but there are some minor ones.
>
> At the moment, I know of no one interested in running pthreaded ubik,
>   

Really ?  Then you haven't been paying attention ;)


> so there's a bit of chicken and egg -- i.e., I know what fixes need to
> be done, but need some people willing to run it and give a green light
> on it (or to kick me and tell me it's still broken).  And I'd need to
> carve out some time to work on it.
>   

AFAIK the major bug (the VL DB server handing clients incorrect 
file-servers addresses causing them to lose access to volumes) hasn't 
been resolved ?


ali