Sponsored Content
Operating Systems Solaris How can I setup a NFS server to share with a whole network? Post 302501550 by krishania on Thursday 3rd of March 2011 10:26:10 PM
Old 03-03-2011
Thank you. I will try that. I had set it up with

share -F nfs -o rw=machine1, machine2 /shared_directory_path

Since all the machines previously had static IP's and I could name each one of them. I did not realize that I could just give a rw option, without giving the machine names.

Appreciate the help.
 

10 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. Solaris

NFS share options

Hello, I'm doing a Perl script to parse the dfstab file and find dangerous configurations (rw to everyone, root access, etc). My question is, if I have a share command like this: share -F nfs -o ro=chrome:copper:zinc,root=chrome /usr/man it means that the /usr/man is "rw" to everyone... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: psimoes79
6 Replies

2. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

can i mount nfs share on windows 2003 server

this is probably a bit dumb ...but i read somewhere that one of the nfs versions can be mounted on a windows 2003 server ..if yes ..does anyone know how this can be achieved (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: tarunicon
1 Replies

3. UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers

Linux Server Network Settings - Share Directory Structure

Hello Unix Gurus Who I Hope Reads This, I have quasi-inherited control over a Linux cluster at a university research lab. The post-doc that set it up is gone, and the person in charge of administering the cluster doesn't know a ton about Linux. Amongst other things, I want to use the cluster... (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: mbl
0 Replies

4. AIX

Access AIX NFS Share from Windows Server 2008

Hi all, Hopefully this question hasn't been asked a thousand times. I am trying to connect a Windows Server to an exported NFS share which resides on an AIX box. I think the directory is exported correctly from the AIX side but I can't verify that because I didn't do it myself. On the... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: ThePistonDoctor
6 Replies

5. AIX

NFS Share Setup On AIX

Hi all, I have one IBM AIX server (serverA) which is connected to the san storage. I have created a volume group and also file system (jfs2) and mounted to directory /profit. After that I created a NFS share for that directory and started the NFS daemon. Over at another server, which is... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: a_sim
1 Replies

6. Solaris

Can't access NFS Share on Solaris Server from a Linux Client

Hi, I am trying to access a NFS shared directory on Solaris 10 Server from a client which is RHEL 4 Server. On the NFS Server, in /etc/dfs/, I added following line to dfstab file. & then ran the following On the client machine, while running the mount command, I am... (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: SunilB2011
0 Replies

7. Red Hat

Unable to access NFS share on Solaris Server from Linux client

Hi, I am trying to access a NFS shared directory on Solaris 10 Server from a client which is RHEL 4 Server. On the NFS Server, in /etc/dfs/, I added following line to dfstab file. share -F nfs -o rw /var/share & then ran the following svcadm -v enable -r... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: SunilB2011
3 Replies

8. Red Hat

NFS share

Hi, I have an NFS server, i want to mount that nfs share which is having around 500GB to my client system. But my client system doesnt have any free space, is it possible to mount that nfs share in my client. Regards, Mastan (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: mastansaheb
1 Replies

9. Shell Programming and Scripting

Mount NFS Share On NFS Client via bash script.

I need a help of good people with effective bash script to mount nfs shared, By the way I did the searches, since i haven't found that someone wrote a script like this in the past, I'm sure it will serve more people. The scenario as follow: An NFS Client with Daily CRON , running bash script... (4 Replies)
Discussion started by: Brian.t
4 Replies

10. Solaris

Solaris 10 NFS client cannot mount a share from a Windows server

I have a Solaris 10 server, I'm trying to mount a share from a Windows nfs server. If I add this entry (tst-walnut:/test_sap_nfs - /majid nfs - yes rw,soft) to my /etc/vfstab, then I can mount, but when I create a file by root:root, the file owner changes to... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: Hiroshi
1 Replies
FSVS - Master/Local HOWTO(5)					       fsvs					      FSVS - Master/Local HOWTO(5)

NAME
HOWTO: Master/Local repositories - This HOWTO describes how to use a single working copy with multiple repositories. This HOWTO describes how to use a single working copy with multiple repositories. Please read the HOWTO: Backup first, to know about basic steps using FSVS. Rationale If you manage a lot of machines with similar or identical software, you might notice that it's a bit of work keeping them all up-to-date. Sure, automating distribution via rsync or similar is easy; but then you get identical machines, or you have to play with lots of exclude patterns to keep the needed differences. Here another way is presented; and even if you don't want to use FSVS for distributing your files, the ideas presented here might help you keep your machines under control. Preparation, repository layout In this document the basic assumption is that there is a group of (more or less identical) machines, that share most of their filesystems. Some planning should be done beforehand; while the ideas presented here might suffice for simple versioning, your setup can require a bit of thinking ahead. This example uses some distinct repositories, to achieve a bit more clarity; of course these can simply be different paths in a single repository (see Using a single repository for an example configuration). Repository in URL base: trunk/ bin/ ls true lib/ libc6.so modules/ sbin/ mkfs usr/ local/ bin/ sbin/ tags/ branches/ Repository in URL machine1 (similar for machine2): trunk/ etc/ HOSTNAME adjtime network/ interfaces passwd resolv.conf shadow var/ log/ auth.log messages tags/ branches/ User data versioning If you want to keep the user data versioned, too, a idea might be to start a new working copy in every home directory; this way o the system- and (several) user-commits can be run in parallel, o the intermediate home directory in the repository is not needed, and o you get a bit more isolation (against FSVS failures, out-of-space errors and similar). o Furthermore FSVS can work with smaller file sets, which helps performance a bit (less dentries to cache at once, less memory used, etc.). A/ Andrew/ .bashrc .ssh/ .kde/ Alexander/ .bashrc .ssh/ .kde/ B/ Bertram/ A cronjob could simply loop over the directories in /home, and call fsvs for each one; giving a target URL name is not necessary if every home-directory is its own working copy. Note: URL names can include a forward slash / in their name, so you might give the URLs names like home/Andrew - although that should not be needed, if every home directory is a distinct working copy. Using master/local repositories Imagine having 10 similar machines with the same base-installation. Then you install one machine, commit that into the repository as base/trunk, and make a copy as base/released. The other machines get base/released as checkout source, and another (overlaid) from eg. machine1/trunk. Per-machine changes are always committed into the machineX/trunk of the per-machine repository; this would be the host name, IP address, and similar things. On the development machine all changes are stored into base/trunk; if you're satisfied with your changes, you merge them (see Branching, tagging, merging) into base/released, whereupon all other machines can update to this latest version. So by looking at machine1/trunk you can see the history of the machine-specific changes; and in base/released you can check out every old version to verify problems and bugs. Note: You can take this system a bit further: optional software packages could be stored in other subtrees. They should be of lower priority than the base tree, so that in case of conflicts the base should always be preferred (but see 1). Here is a small example; machine1 is the development machine, machine2 is a client. machine1$ fsvs urls name:local,P:200,svn+ssh://lserver/per-machine/machine1/trunk machine1$ fsvs urls name:base,P:100,http://bserver/base-install1/trunk # Determine differences, and commit them machine1$ fsvs ci -o commit_to=local /etc/HOSTNAME /etc/network/interfaces /var/log machine1$ fsvs ci -o commit_to=base / Now you've got a base-install in your repository, and can use that on the other machine: machine2$ fsvs urls name:local,P:200,svn+ssh://lserver/per-machine/machine2/trunk machine2$ fsvs urls name:base,P:100,http://bserver/base-install1/trunk machine2$ fsvs sync-repos # Now you see differences of this machines' installation against the other: machine2$ fsvs st # You can see what is different: machine2$ fsvs diff /etc/X11/xorg.conf # You can take the base installations files: machine2$ fsvs revert /bin/ls # And put the files specific to this machine into its repository: machine2$ fsvs ci -o commit_to=local /etc/HOSTNAME /etc/network/interfaces /var/log Now, if this machine has a harddisk failure or needs setup for any other reason, you boot it (eg. via PXE, Knoppix or whatever), and do (3) # Re-partition and create filesystems (if necessary) machine2-knoppix$ fdisk ... machine2-knoppix$ mkfs ... # Mount everything below /mnt machine2-knoppix$ mount <partition[s]> /mnt/[...] machine2-knoppix$ cd /mnt # Do a checkout below /mnt machine2-knoppix$ fsvs co -o softroot=/mnt <urls> Branching, tagging, merging Other names for your branches (instead of trunk, tags and branches) could be unstable, testing, and stable; your production machines would use stable, your testing environment testing, and in unstable you'd commit all your daily changes. Note: Please note that there's no merging mechanism in FSVS; and as far as I'm concerned, there won't be. Subversion just gets automated merging mechanisms, and these should be fine for this usage too. (4) Thoughts about tagging Tagging works just like normally; although you need to remember to tag more than a single branch. Maybe FSVS should get some knowledge about the subversion repository layout, so a fsvs tag would tag all repositories at once? It would have to check for duplicate tag-names (eg. on the base -branch), and just keep it if it had the same copyfrom-source. But how would tags be used? Define them as source URL, and checkout? Would be a possible case. Or should fsvs tag do a merge into the repository, so that a single URL contains all files currently checked out, with copyfrom-pointers to the original locations? Would require using a single repository, as such pointers cannot be across different repositories. If the committed data includes the $FSVS_CONF/.../Urls file, the original layout would be known, too - although to use it a sync-repos would be necessary. Using a single repository A single repository would have to be partitioned in the various branches that are needed for bookkeeping; see these examples. Depending on the number of machines it might make sense to put them in a 1- or 2 level deep hierarchy; named by the first character, like machines/ A/ Axel/ Andreas/ B/ Berta/ G/ Gandalf/ Simple layout Here only the base system gets branched and tagged; the machines simply backup their specific/localized data into the repository. # For the base-system: trunk/ bin/ usr/ sbin/ tags/ tag-1/ branches/ branch-1/ # For the machines: machines/ machine1/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME machine2/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME Per-area Here every part gets its trunk, branches and tags: base/ trunk/ bin/ sbin/ usr/ tags/ tag-1/ branches/ branch-1/ machine1/ trunk/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME tags/ tag-1/ branches/ machine2/ trunk/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME tags/ branches/ Common trunk, tags, and branches Here the base-paths trunk, tags and branches are shared: trunk/ base/ bin/ sbin/ usr/ machine2/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME machine1/ etc/ passwd HOSTNAME tags/ tag-1/ branches/ branch-1/ Other notes 1 Conflicts should not be automatically merged. If two or more trees bring the same file, the file from the highest tree wins - this way you always know the file data on your machines. It's better if a single software doesn't work, compared to a machine that no longer boots or is no longer accessible (eg. by SSH)). So keep your base installation at highest priority, and you've got good chances that you won't loose control in case of conflicting files. 2 If you don't know which files are different in your installs, o install two machines, o commit the first into fsvs, o do a sync-repos on the second, o and look at the status output. 3 As debian includes FSVS in the near future, it could be included on the next KNOPPIX, too! Until then you'd need a custom boot CD, or copy the absolute minimum of files to the harddisk before recovery. There's a utility svntar available; it allows you to take a snapshot of a subversion repository directly into a .tar -file, which you can easily export to destination machine. (Yes, it knows about the meta-data properties FSVS uses, and stores them into the archive.) 4 Why no file merging? Because all real differences are in the per-machine files -- the files that are in the base repository are changed only on a single machine, and so there's an unidirectional flow. BTW, how would you merge your binaries, eg. /bin/ls? Feedback If you've got any questions, ideas, wishes or other feedback, please tell us in the mailing list users [at] fsvs.tigris.org. Thank you! Author Generated automatically by Doxygen for fsvs from the source code. Version trunk:2424 11 Mar 2010 FSVS - Master/Local HOWTO(5)
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:52 AM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy