On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 06:01:36PM -0800, Brian de Alwis wrote:
> > You can soft mount instead of hard mount - then you get a timeout resulting
> > in an I/O error, instead of indefinite waiting for the server to reappear.
> 
> I'll give that a try. Hard mounts causes all sorts of problems;
> though I've only started to notice the problems of late.
> 
> Are there any other disadvantages to soft mounts?

yes. As you're not waiting for the server to be reachable again (e.g, to
reboot), but timeout and get an error, e.g. programs read from a soft-mounted
filesystem will spontaneosly coredump when the network is busy.

Regards,
	-is