[Samba] cifs verses smbfs for Linux clients

[Volker Lendecke]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 06:10:47PM -0500, Michael Lueck wrote:
> I get the impression that smbfs is samba.org developed code where as cifs 
> is from elsewhere. Thus the point of confusion. Why is samba.org not 
> developing the preferred code in this case?

The problem is -- where would you host smbmount if we
removed it from the samba release?

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20080219/6022c0ec/attachment.bin