On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:48:31 -0400 Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org wrote:
We're heavy AFS users here at Boston University, and it's going to be a major blow to not have an AFS client available. OpenAFS, last I looked, said that it'd take them a year to properly develop a 2.6 version *if* they got some funding to do so -- and they don't. Arla doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
This is a fair assessement of the status, sans the "funding" whines. It's not as if anyone else is rolling in money.
So that leaves the in-kernel AFS -- which was apparently developed by someone at Red Hat. (An enterprise customer needed it, perhaps?)
The "someone"'s name is clearly present in the source, I believe, and that is of David Howells. I and dwmw2 dabbed in it as well.
That client (kAFS) is not useful for any real work and I do not see it becoming one before well into 2.7.
Can someone point me to further information, or nicely tell me about, Red Hat / Fedora's plans in this regard? And what I can do to help? (From a tester's perspective at the very least.)
Feature requests come in, but David does have other responsibilites. I try to do things about it in the community capacity, but it is not going much of anywhere.
I think it would be the best if you found some grad students to hack on AFS, either OpenAFS or kAFS. Both projects are amendable to patches, in my experience, they just have no hacking cycles to them. It's not important which one you decide to advance, as long as you do.
If you cannot do that, well, that's tough. To stick to RHEL 3 and OpenAFS would probably your best bet.
-- Pete
On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 12:40:19PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
We're heavy AFS users here at Boston University, and it's going to be a major blow to not have an AFS client available. OpenAFS, last I looked, said that it'd take them a year to properly develop a 2.6 version *if* they got some funding to do so -- and they don't. Arla doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
This is a fair assessement of the status, sans the "funding" whines. It's not as if anyone else is rolling in money.
I didn't mean it in a bad way. Just time is money and all that. :)
That client (kAFS) is not useful for any real work and I do not see it becoming one before well into 2.7.
Fair enough.
I think it would be the best if you found some grad students to hack on AFS, either OpenAFS or kAFS. Both projects are amendable to patches, in my experience, they just have no hacking cycles to them. It's not important which one you decide to advance, as long as you do.
It's not like I've got any money either. But there _are_ grad students around here. :)
If you cannot do that, well, that's tough.
Well, it _is_ tough, but I'm surprised that we're the only place that seems to have real interest.
To stick to RHEL 3 and OpenAFS would probably your best bet.
Does RHEL plan to stick with the 2.4 kernel forever?
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Matthew Miller wrote:
If you cannot do that, well, that's tough.
Well, it _is_ tough, but I'm surprised that we're the only place that seems to have real interest.
To stick to RHEL 3 and OpenAFS would probably your best bet.
Does RHEL plan to stick with the 2.4 kernel forever?
I figure RHEL-2/3 will always be 2.4.x. RHEL-4 is probably going to be 2.6.x... that probably tells you where AFS support will be in it.