Backport of gssproxy patches for Fedora 19

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:43:29PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:39:08PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:24:41AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 08:17 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 01:09:39PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 15:37 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I have a backport to 3.9.3 (which turned out to need a couple more
> > > > > > > > > patches in addition to the above) at
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 	git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux-topics.git 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Sorry, I forgot to give the branch: 3.9-gssproxy-backport
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'll grab them from there.  If I have troubles, I'll let you know.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Ok, they're applied in kernel-3.9.4-302.fc19.  Please test things out.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I am getting an oops, I will work with Bruce to find the cause and fix
> > > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > Did you track this down?  We're probably going to be doing another build
> > > > to submit as an update today, and I'd rather not include known oopsing
> > > > patches.  If this doesn't have a fix yet, I'll temporarily remove the
> > > > patches for the update build.
> > > > 
> > > > josh
> > > 
> > > Bruce sent me 2 patches yesterday, but haven't got to test them yet.
> > > The code is not activated by default, so there is little harm in putting
> > > them in, the only thing that will fail is gssproxy, as the whole code
> > > path is enabled only if gssproxy is started at boot.
> > 
> > Did you get a chance to test them?  I'm doing an update today.
> 
> Just setting it up, so I'd expect results in a couple hours.

Hah, bad estimate.  Anyway, 

	git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux-topics.git 3.9-gssproxy-backport

now includes three additional bugfixes that I need to get it working for me.

--b.