It could be nice if the NFS exports added with the advanced edit functionality could be displayed in the NFS configuration page, either in a separate table or as non-editable entries in the main table.
I am mostly bound to use advanced edit as in my home setup most of my export need the usual “all_squash,anonuid=X,anongid=Y”. In this regard it could be also nice to have:
improved add export functionality allowing for custom options instead of requiring the user to write an entire custom entry by themselves;
optional “all_squash,anonuid=,anongid=” configuration preset in the add export functionality, maybe picking uid/gid from a user selection dropdown.
@maxlnc Hello again,
Agreed. Re your feature suggestions, I would suggest that you initially upgrade to 4.5.0-0 which is the most recent release of our testing branch, and have a go at looking into what this feature-add might entail. Our code is actually fairly readable as it goes; and is also mostly commented/fairly readable.
Our main difficulty with approaching feature requests currently is developer time, we had to put in quite the effort with our move from the old v3 (CentOS base) to the new v4 “Built on openSUSE”. But there were loads of things that got improved along the way. However we have now built up quite the technical dept and need to focus on that in order not to drown our future selves in it. This is on-going and pretty much precludes some of the more significant feature requests unfortunately. But you may find that such a feature add is within your current or near future capabilities: hence the suggestion to use the latest testing release, as that is where we add all significant code changes.
Which talks you though setting up a developer environment and compiling from the latest source in the testing channel (which is actually a tad newer than 4.5.0-0, but not by much. But do not use this setup for anything imporant, it’s strickly for development as there is not update capability bar a db wipe and reset.
Hopefully the above counts and again my apologies for not being able to prioritise this currently, but when we are done with removing all the ‘old-stuff’ that we still depend-upon we should be in a far better position feature-add wise which will be nice as it’s great to see things shape up to requests as and when the come in. And yes the NFS share area is another that could do with a bit more, lets say ‘sophistication’.
First, I wanted to second @phillxnet’s thanks for your nice and very helpful feedback on your other thread; this one is another example of it so thank you for all your feedback!
Awesome! Feel free to ask in the forum here about anything that may seem unclear. As @phillxnet’s alluded to, we are currently conducting a lot a deep changes so please let us know if there’s part of our docs that are now somewhat inaccurate.
With regards to your NFS ideas, I too completely agree. I’m personally not as “fluent” with the most commonly-used exports options so it’s great that you shared what is the most important and commonly-used in your experience/opinion.
Maybe this could be implemented like what we currently do for creating a Samba export? We have there a limited set of commonly used settings and a textarea box for users to enter any other options they may need. See our docs for illustration: https://rockstor.com/docs/interface/storage/file_sharing/samba_ops.html#create-a-samba-export-of-a-share
What do you think? Would that be a good starting point for what you were thinking?
Of note, I remember a similar feedback/feature request brought up by @dvgeek a little while ago; this issue would seem like a good starting point to discuss the code details once we get to that point:
