NFS problem
| This forum is proudly powered by Scientific Linux 6 | SL website Download SL Help Search Members |
| Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register ) | Resend Validation Email |
   |
NFS problem| tankist02 |
Posted: Aug 11 2011, 06:49 PM
|
|||||||
|
SLF Newbie Group: Members Posts: 13 Member No.: 301 Joined: 16-June 11  |
Probably something simple, but I can't spot the problem. When trying to mount NFS share always get the following error:
Server side:
Client side:
There is nothing in the server /var/log/message related to NFS after mounting attempts from the client. What else should I check? Where else should I look for NFS/network messages? |
|||||||
|
||||||||
| tankist02 |
Posted: Aug 12 2011, 05:20 AM
|
|
|
SLF Newbie Group: Members Posts: 13 Member No.: 301 Joined: 16-June 11 |
Resolved by chmod -R 755 on the server exported directory. Some subdirectories that I tried to mount had wrong permissions. Duh.
|
|
|
|
||
| joutlan |
Posted: Aug 12 2011, 06:48 AM
|
|
 SLF Founder  Group: Admins Posts: 1152 Member No.: 1 Joined: 8-April 11 |
There's a thread around here where I had the same kind of "moment" regarding permissions.
 -------------------- DΞLL Precision M6700: 17 inch NB//i7-quad w/USB 3.0, 16.0GB, Quadro K5000M 2.0GB DDR3, RGBLED //W8P64/Scientific Linux 6.4 x64
DΞLL Vostro 3350 Nirvana: 13 inch NB w/ IntelSSD// W8Px64 (Work;Games) Nexus 4 //Android |
|
  
|
||
| zxq9 |
Posted: Aug 12 2011, 08:12 AM
|
|
 SLF Advocate Group: Members Posts: 367 Member No.: 611 Joined: 5-August 11 |
Another (really weird) thing that can cause that error and yet not generate a single log message is having a --no-nfs-version=1 argument passed to rpc.mountd. This is wierd for two reasons:
Check your /etc/sysconfig/nfs file for a line that says MOUNTD_NFS_V1="no" and remove it if its there. This was a big problem in some distros which had forever had lines to explicitely turn off NFS versions 1 through 3 -- and it worked its way by habit into more than a few nfs config files here and there. I just fixed this problem on my own network the other day, actually, because someone had put the line back into the nfs config file thinking it was missing. Of course, that same error can come from permissions, as already discussed, or come from more mysterious naming mismatches or names not matching in nscd or rpc.idmapd caches... which is why new admins will pull their hair out for a whole day after checking and re-checking their settings (which are correct) to no avail, only to have everything magically work the next morning leaving nothing but mysteries in their wake. Particularly quirky is the way NFSv4 doesn't care the numerical value of the UID, but does care the numeric value of the GID when enforcing rwx permissions. (Why this was considered a good idea, we'll never know -- but only because I'm too lazy to dig through the nfs-kernel mailinglist and find where/when the discussion about this happened...) |
|
|
|
||
 |
|