smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt

[Urban Widmark]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Abdij Bhat wrote:

> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe "smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around 300
> to 400Kb each.

smbmnt is linked with libsmb even though it doesn't use anything from it.
It is possible to make it much smaller by editing the makefile. I have a
patch if you want. smbmnt exists to allow parts of the code to be setuid
root for normal user mounts and is run by smbmount.

smbumount is only needed if you need normal users to mount and umount
things. root can umount with the normal umount command so you could just
remove it.

smbmount only uses a few parts of libsmb directly, but there are a lot of
dependencies between different parts of libsmb.


>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without it? Also

If you don't enable any of the kernel codepage modules, nothing extra will
be built. If you don't enable CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT then smbfs will not
use any nls code.


> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above files

Those are samba codepages and the smb.conf controls which ones to use,
with these being the defaults(?).

/Urban