[clug] Fedora 20 upgrade has broken NFS???

[Scott Ferguson]

On 13/06/14 13:07, Randall Crook wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I just upgraded from Fedora 19 to Fedora 20 and now my favourite editors
> refuse to write to nfs mounts.
> 
> Bit of a history, I have been running FC19 for about a year with out
> issues. I have a nfs mounted share from a Solaris box that holds the
> code I maintain. I use gvim, gedit and kate extensively with the files
> on this share.
> 
> After I upgraded from FC19 to FC20, it seems any editor that messes with
> temporary files when writing out to the nfs share fails with permission
> or "missing location" errors.
> 
> If I fire up a shell I can use touch, echo, cp, mv, and even nano to
> create files on the share with out any issues. It seems the advanced
> editors are doing some magic that the underlying nfs is not liking.
> 
> Some things I have noticed:
> 
> the umask is 0022 (Seems fine to me).
> the temp files the advanced editors are creating end up with permissions
> of 600 (Shouldn't be an issue).
> I have messed a lot with the fstab entry for the nfs mount to no avail.
> it is currently:
> 
> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:/js   /proto   nfs    
> rw,_netdev,nolock,sec=sys,vers=3,soft,intr,bg 0 0

I use the following on Debian (from dodgy memory SUSe works with the
same client settings).

xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx:/share  /mnt/share
       nfs4    rsize=8192,wsize=8192,timeo=14,soft     0 0


> 
> I have messed with the sec and lock options as well as read and write
> sizes but it doesn't seem to make a difference.
> 
> I have also determined it is on nfs only. ext4, sshfs, cifs all work
> fine. Just nfs and advanced editors dont seem to like each other.. I am
> hoping someone on here might have some suggestions.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Randall Crook.
> 
> 

I don't use Fedora so my fstab (example shown above) may not be the
solution to your problem, I also don't have to worry about backward
compatibility with earlier NFS versions... but I can edit on NFS shares
using nano/sed/touch/cp/kwrite (so kate should work fine, I just don't
use it).

You may also want to check your iptables.rules (and SELinux if you have
it enabled).