From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] fs hardware configuration
Message-ID: <20021202162152.S22558@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
References: <a9ca1affd5a9d7cf4f28469d7233b878@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <a9ca1affd5a9d7cf4f28469d7233b878@plan9.escet.urjc.es>; from Fco.J.Ballesteros on Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 09:31:57AM +0100
Date: Mon,  2 Dec 2002 16:21:52 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2ba55240-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 09:31:57AM +0100, Fco.J.Ballesteros wrote:
>
> > Also, are the idefs changes (dorman/geoff/nemo) in the latest
> > distribution?
>
> Yes, they're. Our local fs is now the one distributed.
> We recompiled and booted the resulting binary just to be sure.

With or without the "allow/disallow" commands?  I disabled the former,
left the latter because I feel more comfortable that way.  But what is
the released standard?

++L