[linux-cifs-client] Re: suse vs fedora (mount -t cifs)

Valent Turkovic valent.turkovic at gmail.com
Wed Sep 20 19:20:14 GMT 2006


Seams Fedora has some other mechanism, because there aren't there
files/folders you talk about.

# ls -al /proc/fs/
total 0
dr-xr-xr-x   4 root root 0 Sep 20 21:17 .
dr-xr-xr-x 155 root root 0 Sep 20 09:37 ..
dr-xr-xr-x   2 root root 0 Sep 20 21:17 nfsd
dr-xr-xr-x   2 root root 0 Sep 20 21:17 xfs

Do you have any other ideas maby? I would be really grateful if I
would resolve this issue with mounting in Fedora.

Thank you once more for your effort.

On 9/19/06, Steve French (smfltc) <smfltc at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >I want to mount samba share //10.0.0.1/test to local machine /test and
> >I want the owner of /test to be user "pero".
> >
> >On Suse I did it like this:
> >smbmount //10.0.0.1/test /test -o username=pero,uid=pero,gid=pero
> >
> >fedora doesn't use smbmount so I tried "mount -t cifs" as suggested:
> >
> >mount -t cifs //10.0.0.1/test /test -o username=pero,uid=pero,gid=pero
> >
> >but when I do 'ls -al /" I see that owner is not set as I wish it
> >(owner and group should be "pero").
> >
> >How do I mount samba share with "pero" user as owner of mounted share ?
> >
> >
> CIFS  supports the Unix extensions to CIFS so will attempt to use the
> uid/gid on files returned from
> the server, if the server (such as Samba) negotiates support for the
> CIFS Unix Extensions.
> If you want cifs to use a particular uid/gid for all files on the mount,
> then you must disable the
> Unix Extensions (you can turn them on again before the mount to the next
> server if you want).
>     "echo 0 > /proc/fs/cifs/LinuxExtensionsEnabled"
> then umount/mount.
>
> If the server is Windows or NetApp (rather than e.g. Samba) ie does not
> support the
> Unix extensions then what you already tried should work (you might try
> specifying the uid/gid
> numerically - you might have an older mount.cifs before support for
> specifying uid/gid
> by username was added).
>
> For both SuSE and RedHat you will probably find cifs more
> functional/stable than smbfs but there
> are a few exceptions (Kerberos support) which we are working.
>


-- 
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.


More information about the linux-cifs-client mailing list