[gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

Greetings,

[New readers start here...   :) ]

I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying to 
get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a chroot on 
my M9 machine. I read all the docs, I thought about the help that was offered 
here, I changed file systems and partitions around - everything I could think 
of.

The answer was simple, and I stumbled over it in a post on Stack Exchange: the 
behaviour of NFS mount calls changed in NFS v4. I didn't need to change /etc/
exports on the i5, but the NFS-mount call on the M9 did need to change.

# cat /etc/exports		# on the i5
/mnt/nfs \
   192.168.178.7(rw,sync,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash,crossmnt,fsid=0)
/mnt/nfs/portage \
   192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
/mnt/nfs/packages \
   192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)

$ grep nfs /etc/init.d/nuci		# on the M9. Nuci is the I5
    mount -t nfs 192.168.178.4:portage /mnt/nuci/var/db/repos/gentoo
    mount -t nfs 192.168.178.4:packages /mnt/nuci/var/cache/packages

Notice the absence of '/mnt/nfs' from the M9 mount commands. That's what was 
tripping me up all that time.

Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something 
myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be rebuked.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Michael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1776 bytes --]

On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> [New readers start here...   :) ]
> 
> I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> to get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a
> chroot on my M9 machine. I read all the docs, I thought about the help that
> was offered here, I changed file systems and partitions around - everything
> I could think of.
> 
> The answer was simple, and I stumbled over it in a post on Stack Exchange:
> the behaviour of NFS mount calls changed in NFS v4. I didn't need to change
> /etc/ exports on the i5, but the NFS-mount call on the M9 did need to
> change.

Can you please share the link?

> # cat /etc/exports		# on the i5
> /mnt/nfs \
>    192.168.178.7(rw,sync,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash,crossmnt,fsid=0)
> /mnt/nfs/portage \
>    192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
> /mnt/nfs/packages \
>    192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
> 
> $ grep nfs /etc/init.d/nuci		# on the M9. Nuci is the I5
>     mount -t nfs 192.168.178.4:portage /mnt/nuci/var/db/repos/gentoo
>     mount -t nfs 192.168.178.4:packages /mnt/nuci/var/cache/packages
> 
> Notice the absence of '/mnt/nfs' from the M9 mount commands. That's what was
> tripping me up all that time.
> 
> Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something
> myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be rebuked.

I had (another) look at the wiki.  You're right, it seems to describe NFSv3 
only.  I don't have NFSv3 here to compare.  With NFSv4 you export the global 
root directory to allow its subdirectories to be exported too - at least this 
is how I understand it works on my systems.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> > to get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a
> > chroot on my M9 machine. I read all the docs, I thought about the help
> > that was offered here, I changed file systems and partitions around -
> > everything I could think of.
> > 
> > The answer was simple, and I stumbled over it in a post on Stack Exchange:
> > the behaviour of NFS mount calls changed in NFS v4. I didn't need to
> > change /etc/ exports on the i5, but the NFS-mount call on the M9 did need
> > to change.
> 
> Can you please share the link?

Sorry Michael - it was at the end of infinitely many searches and I didn't make 
a note of it.

<snip> I should have said: "in NFSv4 the client specifies the server path 
*relative* to the virtual root."

> I had (another) look at the wiki.  You're right, it seems to describe NFSv3
> only.  I don't have NFSv3 here to compare.  With NFSv4 you export the global
> root directory to allow its subdirectories to be exported too - at least
> this is how I understand it works on my systems.

...but today I see, buried in what you might call the small print: "If the NFS 
server or client support NFSv3 only, the full path to the exported directory 
(e.g. /export/home or /export/data) needs to be specified when mounting." [1]

We could debate whether that's guidance enough.

1.   https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Nfs-utils#Mounting_exports , about a page 
down.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Michael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1069 bytes --]

On Tuesday 3 December 2024 11:29:15 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:

> > I had (another) look at the wiki.  You're right, it seems to describe
> > NFSv3
> > only.  I don't have NFSv3 here to compare.  With NFSv4 you export the
> > global root directory to allow its subdirectories to be exported too - at
> > least this is how I understand it works on my systems.
> 
> ...but today I see, buried in what you might call the small print: "If the
> NFS server or client support NFSv3 only, the full path to the exported
> directory (e.g. /export/home or /export/data) needs to be specified when
> mounting." [1]
> 
> We could debate whether that's guidance enough.
> 
> 1.   https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Nfs-utils#Mounting_exports , about a page
> down.

Yes, but further up all the IPv4 configuration syntax still shows v3 style 
examples with '/export/foo' paths.  I think there should be clearer 
disambiguation with separate examples between v3 and v4.  However, isn't NFS 
v3 considered legacy by now?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 3 December 2024 11:44:50 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:

> ... I think there should be clearer disambiguation with separate examples
> between v3 and v4. However, isn't NFS v3 considered legacy by now?

Perhaps, but that wiki page was apparently last changed on 2 August this year.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 GMT Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > [New readers start here...   :) ]
> > 
> > I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> > to get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a
> > chroot on my M9 machine. I read all the docs, I thought about the help
> > that
> > was offered here, I changed file systems and partitions around -
> > everything
> > I could think of.
> > 
> > The answer was simple, and I stumbled over it in a post on Stack Exchange:
> > the behaviour of NFS mount calls changed in NFS v4. I didn't need to
> > change
> > /etc/ exports on the i5, but the NFS-mount call on the M9 did need to
> > change.
> 
> Can you please share the link?

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/388410/nfs-mount-failed-reason-given-by-server-no-such-file-or-directory

It's comment 15.

I found this after I gave up running ~amd64 and reverted to a backup from 12 
days ago.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Matt Jolly]

Hi Peter,

On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something 
>myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be rebuked.

You can raise issues on the "Talk" page for a given article, e.g. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Nfs-utils

Ideally, since it's a wiki, if you know how to fix it you can edit the page directly. Don't be afraid, other editors will help polish your contribution if it's a little rough around the edges as long as it's complete.

Trying this from Thunderbird mobile. Hopefully it doesn't mangle the reply!

Cheers,

Matt

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:08:51 Greenwich Mean Time Matt Jolly wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> 
wrote:
> >Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something
> >myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be
> >rebuked.
> You can raise issues on the "Talk" page for a given article, e.g.
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Nfs-utils
> 
> Ideally, since it's a wiki, if you know how to fix it you can edit the page
> directly. Don't be afraid, other editors will help polish your contribution
> if it's a little rough around the edges as long as it's complete.
> 
> Trying this from Thunderbird mobile. Hopefully it doesn't mangle the reply!

That's a real help; thank you Matt.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:28:44 Greenwich Mean Time I wrote:
> On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:08:51 Greenwich Mean Time Matt Jolly wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> > 
> > On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey
> > <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > >Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something
> > >myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be
> > >rebuked.
> > 
> > You can raise issues on the "Talk" page for a given article, e.g.
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Nfs-utils
> > 
> > Ideally, since it's a wiki, if you know how to fix it you can edit the
> > page
> > directly. Don't be afraid, other editors will help polish your
> > contribution
> > if it's a little rough around the edges as long as it's complete.
> > 
> > Trying this from Thunderbird mobile. Hopefully it doesn't mangle the
> > reply!
> 
> That's a real help; thank you Matt.

I've made a suggestion about the nfs-utils page, but I've also been thinking 
about Gentoo wiki documents generally, because I find them unsatisfactory: not 
their content, but the style of presentation. I was documentation manager on a 
200-man-year software project years ago (supplier side), so I think I know 
what I'm talking about [1].

One problem is the apparent absence of structure in the body of the document. 
A table of contents appears at the top, complete with numbered sections and 
subsections in a clear hierarchy, but those numbers appear nowhere else. The 
complexity of most of these documents is such that, once deep into the text, 
the relationship with the rest of it is invisible. This sounds academic, but 
it's real; reliance on font sizes to distinguish headings is not enough on its 
own. An immediate improvement would result from including the numbers from the 
contents list. I imagine it would be comparatively easy to do, as well.

Secondly, the big advantage of viewing on a screen has largely been discarded 
- colour. There are pale coloured backgrounds in some highlights, but I wonder 
whether more could be achieved. I dimly remember the adoption of the present 
style (when was that?), following a 'paper' scheme. (I think that name's 
right.) A consistent style is essential, of course, but why go backwards to an 
earlier technology?

Thirdly, showing terminal commands on a huge black background is much too 
disruptive, visually. They're so overpowering that things like headings 
disappear. I find, especially now my vision is deteriorating, that the 
interleaving of main and secondary topics is often baffling: for instance, the 
choice between openrc and systemd with other alternative streams.

Not enough thought has been given to the combined effect, which is to make the 
documents hard to read and understand.

What does the team think can be done about it?

1.  The fact that the project was cancelled when it became clear that the first 
50% of the work had taken the first 80% of the time, and the second 50% would 
take the other 80% of the time, had nothing to do with the documents.  :_)

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Gentoo wiki [was: Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED]

[Alexis]

Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> writes:

> What does the team think can be done about it?

i'm not a Gentoo dev, merely someone who (a) has Strong Opinions 
about the need for good documentation, and (b) has contributed 
significantly to various FOSS docs, most recently the Gentoo 
wiki[a].

First and foremost, it's important to remember that, unlike some 
other distros (e.g. Fedora, Ubuntu), Gentoo isn't backed by a 
corporation; the overwhelming majority of work is done by 
volunteers, who contribute if and when they can. This means that, 
even if people agree that a particular thing would be Good To 
Have, it's unlikely to happen unless there are people willing to 
commit to doing the work - and, critically, to maintaining it in 
an ongoing way. There's nothing compelling people to work on 
particular things. The wiki is no exception. i think it's fair to 
say that those of us who've regularly worked on the wiki are 
keenly aware of all the areas that need improvement, and of the 
fact that there's much more work that needs to be done than there 
are volunteers willing to take on the work.

Secondly, the wiki runs on MediaWiki, the software used by 
Wikipedia, so that provides some constraints on what's able to be 
done, or at least how easily something is able to be 
done. Something might be _possible_ to do, but require more work 
than people are willing to do. Or it might not. It can vary.

Thirdly, there are some aspects of presentation that are 
subjective enough that they lead to substantial bikeshedding if 
people's differing and reasonable preferences aren't taken into 
consideration. For example, there are many people who prefer dark 
themes, and have Strong Opinions about being forced to deal with 
light themes. i very much prefer light themes myself, and get 
cranky when forced to try to read Web sites that insist on dark 
themes - particularly when they're low-contrast, which is 
increasingly problematic for my aging eyes - so i can relate to 
people placed in the opposite situation. What that means is that 
design changes can't be assumed to be happening in _only_ a light 
theme context, or a dark theme context. Nor can it be assumed that 
the wiki will always be viewed on a desktop device, rather e.g. a 
phone - indeed, people might be using their phone to access the 
wiki because they've broken their desktop system and are trying to 
work out how to fix it. :-)

Finally, i'd like to suggest that you open an issue on 
bugs.gentoo.org, under the "Websites" -> "Wiki" component, with 
your thoughts and suggestions, because that's much more likely to 
be seen by the relevant people:

  https://bugs.gentoo.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Websites


Alexis.

[a] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Flexibeast

Re: Gentoo wiki [was: Re: [gentoo-user] NFS mounting - SOLVED]

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 5 December 2024 00:55:38 GMT Alexis wrote:
> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> writes:
> > What does the team think can be done about it?
> 
> I'm not a Gentoo dev, merely someone who (a) has Strong Opinions
> about the need for good documentation, and (b) has contributed
> significantly to various FOSS docs, most recently the Gentoo
> wiki[a].

--->8

Thank you Alexis. I accept all your points, and of course I'm well aware that 
there are severe resource constraints.

I'll consider how much I can contribute to the effort, and whether to open a 
bug as you suggest. I'm conscious that my coding days are 40 years in the 
past, and uncomfortable that I can't help on that front, so perhaps I can do 
my bit in documentation.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.