urban at teststation.com
Thu May 30 03:22:03 GMT 2002
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> Hmmm, I don't think that any do yet.
> I expect to be looking at smbclient and will try to put the code into
> libsmb, but that is still an issue for things like smbfs, I believe
> because of the amount of junk that might get dragged in.
Regarding smbfs support (I have just browsed the SNIA(?) docs on that
and don't know anything beyond they few lines I have read ...)
On some operations trying to access a directory which is really on a
different server (or share?) an error code is returned, right?.
What smbfs could do then is simply to mount that other directory on itself
(would work sort of like autofs or maybe even with the help of autofs).
To connect to the other server smbfs would call on "smbmount" and the
amount of junk needed in kernel space would be kept to a minimum. But
maybe there is more to dfs than that.
I have however no immediate plans to do this. Also, if cifsfs when
released is better than smbfs (faster, more stable, with dfs support, etc)
it should replace it and work on smbfs features would be a waste of time.
There was some comment on this list that the source for the cifsfs module
would be made available on the samba ftp. Is it now?
More information about the samba-technical