smbmount et al...

[Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hello!

> 	I'm also one of the primary bitchers about the change in syntax
> from the old smbfs version of smbmount to the new samba version of smbmount.
> I'm not going to go down the road of why it got where it is or why it should
> or shouldn't have.  We have users that are heavily invested in it and we
> have some responsibility to the sins of the past...  So be it.

Is it only the syntax that annoys you or is it also the kernel-level
interface? I must admit that the syntax is really ugly, but it was the
fastest way to get something use the kernel interface. IMO this kernel
interface is necessary, as I did not want all the fancy stuff like
netbios name lookup or encrypted passwords in the kernel. The syntax
could be improved, making the 2.1 stuff look very similar to the 2.0
smbmount and still use smbclient to do the authentication.

Volker

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBNf9moz/9BWnmOc5FAQGG6AP/ag7SYN8D1MEVpSjvnR3r1JsgoI1z2R/0
cC/gN5+thU+aBISRDs6fcinHFFgy0sJ3W6tiCo5H2Q14J7qtwySxSJiJDVew7qWy
I+40azLKwkg4vaNgTeUrvSuPC2iAPieyFcy8sNlQa2znJULnzUvJZ+EM1yX+lruG
DEyJ+dSddPQ=
=UHE2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----