Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!thurlow
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs
Subject: Re: Is RPC in SVR4 implemented in kernel or user level?
Keywords: SVR4
Message-ID: <103929@convex.convex.com>
Date: 13 Jul 90 22:08:36 GMT
References: <1990Jul10.032917.13692@cbnews.att.com> <103795@convex.convex.com> <2503@sequent.cs.qmw.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@convex.com
Lines: 20

liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts) writes:

>Interesting. Back in NFS 3.0 days there was a significant
>difference in that kernel RPC is assumed to be for NFS purposes
>and so assumes idempotence, whereas that user-level RPC stuff
>doesn't make this assumption.

Oh, there's still a significant difference; there are four files
that do "kernel RPC" and do not get included in libc.  My point
was that the majority of the files were the same and so were
symlinked or replicated as appropriate.  As to mount/mountd,
I don't know enough about the user-level side to comment, but
I do know different call routines are used.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com or thurlow%convex.com@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A geek is a terrible thing to waste.  Help support the 1990 "Get A Life"
Initiative!  Send your contributions now! Operators are standing by!