Il faut utiliser l'option noresvport de mount pour que mount n'utilise pas des ports sources inférieur à 1024
Why do you have to? Tradition, mostly. Once upon a time, restricting NFS to privileged ports (<1023) was considered a security measure. Back when people were using mainframe computers, this made sure that the NFS software on the client side was part of the OS/approved by the administrator, since a program can only use a privileged port if it's run by the root user. Today, this makes no sense because anyone can own a computer and have root access, so this doesn't mean anything in terms of security.
By default, many NFS servers don't allow non-privileged source ports. Some NFS clients (such as Ubuntu's), default to using a privileged source port unless otherwise specified, which is why your Linux client works without issue. Clearly, the OS X client doesn't do this. I don't know if that was an Apple design choice or something inherited from BSD. I know that Solaris also defaults to a non-privileged port.
The two ways of avoiding this problem are, telling the OS X client to use a privileged port, as you discovered, or configuring your NFS server to allow non-privileged ports (look it up in your server's documentation).
How do you get OS X to use a privileged port using a GUI? As far as I know, you can't on versions > 10.6. One used to be able to mount NFS shares in Disk Utility and type in extra options, but that was removed. (details) It was never a simple button or anything. NFS is hardly something most of the "non-techy" crowd need, so I guess it wasn't a priority and there are reasons routinely using privileged ports isn't a great idea.
I haven't tried it, but http://www.bresink.com/osx/NFSManager.html seems to allow configuration of OS X's NFS features without the command line.
Comment perdre 30 min
:set backupcopy=yes
When you want to modify a file, you have two options, each with its benefits and drawbacks.
You can overwrite the file in place. This does not use any extra space, and conserves the hard links, permissions and any other attribute beyond the content of the existing file. The major drawback of doing this is that if anything happens while the file is being written (the application crashes, or the power goes out), you end up with a partially written file.
You can write the new version of the file to a new file with a different name, then move it into place. This uses more space and breaks hard links, and if you have write permissions on a file but not on the directory it contains, you can't do it at all. On the flip side, the old version of the file is atomically replaced by the new version, so at every point in time the file name points to a valid, complete version of the file.
http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/options.html#%27backup%27
Comment monter une partition automatiquement au démarrage de votre distribution linux ?