# Since update to nfs-utils-1.3.1-r1 no mount at boot anymore

## 102039

Hi,

since the update to nfs-utils-1.3.1-r1 nfs shares from a remote NFS server are not mounted anymore, when booting the client gentoo machines. When I downgrade to 1.2.9-r3 the shares are mounted again at boot time.

My /etc/fstab on the client machines look like this:

```

nfsserver.domain.local:/home/user/share1       /home/user/share1        nfs     rw,_netdev,auto 0 0

nfsserver.domain.local:/home/user/share2       /home/user/share2        nfs     rw,_netdev,auto   0 0

```

Any idea why?

----------

## krinn

from nfs-utils to nfs-utils version the "value" of the "nfs" tag change from nfsv3=nfs nfsv4=nfs4 to nfs=nfsv4

now that your fstab try to mount your server as an nfs3 style kindof mount, you should force nfsv3 in your fstab.

because using "nfs" now imply mounting nfsv4 shares.

try addding <nfsvers=3, vers=3> to your mount options and it should fix it.

----------

## depontius

I've been running for years with "nfs4" in my fstype field in /etc/fstab.  I missed my regular update last weekend, so I haven't seen this one. But that sounds like an alternate syntax for your suggestion.  In my case it sounds like the default is moving to where I've been running.

----------

## krinn

In real i don't think the nfs4 tag disappears yet, it just that with nfs one it goes from trying first nfsv4 than v3, than v2... And the result is random (but mostly it fail)

----------

## John R. Graham

 *Wurstteppich wrote:*   

> since the update to nfs-utils-1.3.1-r1 nfs shares from a remote NFS server are not mounted anymore, when booting the client gentoo machines. When I downgrade to 1.2.9-r3 the shares are mounted again at boot time.
> 
> Any idea why?

 Yes. The nfsmount init script from nfs-utils has been replaced with netmount from openrc. In addition, all NFS client daemon startup is now handled by the nfsclient init script (from nfs-utils). The following should fix you up:

```
for i in rpc.statd nfsmount ; do rc-update del $i default ; done

for i in nfsclient netmount ; do rc-update add $i default ; done
```

I just figured this out myself & updated the Wiki. There doesn't appear to have been a news item on this one, either, and it took me a bit of research to get my mounts back.

- John

----------

## khayyam

 *John R. Graham wrote:*   

> There doesn't appear to have been a news item on this one, either, and it took me a bit of research to get my mounts back.

 

John ... boggles ... it seems this is the new carte blanche policy to break networking as much, and in as many different ways, as possible, on each release post 0.12.x.

best ... khay

----------

## mike155

 *Quote:*   

> for i in rpc.statd nfsmount ; do rc-update del $i default ; done
> 
> for i in nfsclient netmount ; do rc-update add $i default ; done

 

Thanks, John! Your posting saved me a lot of time!

----------

## Biker

 *John R. Graham wrote:*   

> There doesn't appear to have been a news item on this one, either, and it took me a bit of research to get my mounts back.
> 
> - John

 

A news item with your solution would have been much appreciated. Even a news item without your provided solution would have been great.

As it is right now, things just broke. Rebooting a server that fails to come up as expected pulled some more of my already sparse hair. (Can't afford test servers in a tiny not-for-profit infrastructure.)

Now we all just have do it. Times (n) computers. Worldwide. By so many end users and administrators. Worldwide.

Sometimes I wonder how many man-hours are required to adopt to such a small 'innocent' change. And how many man-hours are spent by how many people, worldwide, to react to such an 'innocent' change, to transport people to small server installations, to help end-users, etc. I wonder how many man-hours this current change will cost worldwide in determining the root-cause of the error, finding the solution (Thanks for providing it, John) amending the problem and finally explaining to concerned parties and sometimes providing excuses.

Think how much more simple it would have been with a News Item.

And how many hours ( = much money for some ) would have been saved worldwide if just one person would have spent 10 minutes to write a News Item.

Anyways, with your solution, John, all that's left is to 'go do it'. I have only three computers requiring this change, but others may have more...

Regards

Biker-74

----------

## khayyam

 *Biker wrote:*   

> Sometimes I wonder how many man-hours are required to adopt to such a small 'innocent' change. And how many man-hours are spent by how many people, worldwide, to react to such an 'innocent' change, to transport people to small server installations, to help end-users, etc. I wonder how many man-hours this current change will cost worldwide in determining the root-cause of the error, finding the solution (Thanks for providing it, John) amending the problem and finally explaining to concerned parties and sometimes providing excuses.

 

Biker ... indeed, this should be of primary concern wrt any release, particularly as it concerns basic functionality like bringing up the network. What's more is that it wasn't just nfs-utils effected, there was also breakage incurred by the change from runscript to openrc-run (which I had argued would cause unnecessary disruption simply to fix a corner case), and another issue with rc_net*. All of these add to accumulative "man hours" and there are probably others effected similarly outside of the gentoo release cycle.

best ... khay

----------

## John R. Graham

 *Biker wrote:*   

> A news item with your solution would have been much appreciated. Even a news item without your provided solution would have been great.
> 
> As it is right now, things just broke. Rebooting a server that fails to come up as expected pulled some more of my already sparse hair. (Can't afford test servers in a tiny not-for-profit infrastructure.)

 Agreed: we should do better. Thus, see Bug 537650 - net-fs/nfs-utils-1.3.1-r1: As if millions of NFS mounts suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.

Better late than never, maybe? Hopefully.

- John

----------

## John R. Graham

News item is up.  :Smile: 

- John

----------

