smbmount and smbfs (was Re: smbmount et al...)

Michael H. Warfield mhw at
Mon Sep 28 15:51:02 GMT 1998

Bill Hawes enscribed thusly:
> Michael H. Warfield wrote:

> >         Smbfs kernel module (2.1.122):

> >         1) Date stamps bear little resemblance to reality.

> >         Here is an example...

> >         Three systems:

> >         Chaos - Linux 2.1.122
> >         Amber - Linux 2.0.35
> >         Phil  - Windows NT 4.0 SP3

> >         \\phil\public is mounted on /mnt/phil/public on both Chaos and Amber.

> >         On amber "ls -l /mnt/public" date stamps look reasonable:

> > drwxr-xr-x   1 root     root          512 Aug 27 16:14 t_elvis
> > drwxr-xr-x   1 root     root          512 Sep 10 12:06 tellison
> > drwxr-xr-x   1 root     root          512 Sep 15 16:24 telljohann

> Hi Michael,

> I intend to maintain the kernel smbfs code, so please direct any kernel-related bug
> reports to the linux-kernel list.

	That's why I added it...  :-)

> With regards to the timestamp problem, I would suspect that you've mounted the
> volume with incorrect bug-workaround flags. There are differences in the way
> timestamps are handled in Win95 vs NT smb servers, so if smbfs thinks it's talking
> to a Win95 system, timestamps will probably be wrong.

	Oh great...

> If you need to support both NT and Win 95 systems using the same kernel modules,
> you need to _not_ specify the Win 95 kernel config option, but instead use the
> mount time flags.

	Ok...  That fits because, yes I did specify the Win95 bug workaround
option.  You say to use the mount time flags.  Where does that fit in the
smbmount syntax?  I noticed that the smbmount doc's are, shall we say, a bit
weak.  Is this an additional option to the -c "mount /mountpoint ...." string
or is it something that smbmount should be parsing (I would expect the later
but would not be surprised by the former).  I don't find anything in
particular in the smbmount command line parsing that would point a finger
at what it is suppose to be.  The docs on the mount command basically
say it's in smbmount's domain.  If it's suppose to be in smbmount that
either means I'm overlooking it (real easy) or it's another one on my list
to do...

> Regards,
> Bill

 Michael H. Warfield    |  (770) 985-6132   |  mhw at
  (The Mad Wizard)      |  (770) 925-8248   |
  NIC whois:  MHW9      |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471    |  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

More information about the samba-technical mailing list