2810 2012-07-22 02:11:08 +0000 rpcbind: Could we replace portmap with rpcbind 2013-01-07 13:00:00 +0000 1 1 7 Build System, Metadata & Runtime OE-Core connectivity 1.3 x86 Multiple RESOLVED FIXED 9a1c99916bfc8b599e1fd567b0a61b979576b254 Low normal 1.4 1 rongqing.li cristian.iorga alexandru.c.georgescu meta.mr.watcher meta.watcher rongqing.li sgw --- --- --- oldest_to_newest 23356 0 rongqing.li 2012-07-22 02:11:08 +0000 Rpcbind supports more feature than portmap, Like ipv6, nfs4. So could we replace portmap with rpcbind in image and in init scripts by default. 23407 1 sgw 2012-07-23 22:31:09 +0000 What's the size difference in the binary? Can you summarize the feature differences, specifically are there any features that will be lost do to such a switch? Are there other conisderations? 23409 2 rongqing.li 2012-07-24 01:00:09 +0000 the size of rpcbind+rpcinfo is 240k the size of portmap+pmap_dump+pmap_set is 100k. I search on the network, only find that rpcbind has more feature than portmap, does not find that rpcbind lost feature than portmap 24485 3 alexandru.c.georgescu 2012-08-27 09:59:25 +0000 Hello, Do you have any updates regarding rpcbind vs portmap? Thanks, Alex. 24488 4 rongqing.li 2012-08-27 10:07:03 +0000 NO 28389 5 rongqing.li 2012-12-20 02:30:33 +0000 Redhat, Fedora, debian, Ubuntu are using rpcbind by default, If do not using rpcbind, nfs can not work under ipv6 address, and nfs4 does not work.