Linux kernel 2.6 smbfs bugs
Christopher R. Hertel
crh at ubiqx.mn.org
Mon Jan 12 21:33:04 GMT 2004
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 04:13:37PM -0500, Michael B Allen wrote:
> > It doesn't look like these would fail against the cifs vfs, but smbfs still
> > shouldn't oops even it won't be long before smbfs is replaced by cifs vfs
> > for all but a few legacy scenarios.
> Mmm, I hope smbfs sticks around for a few more years though. I don't think most
> Linux people care if MS has EOL'd their operating systems. Personally I plan on
> using NT and 98 for some time. Unless cifsvfs supports everything smbfs does I
> don't see how it can be removed.
I have to agree with Mike on this one. I understand that limiting the
scope of CIFS VFS server support makes the code simpler. At the same
time, NT and Win9x all speak the "NT LM 0.12" dialect. I think that a
single dialect is a reasonable quanta.
"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/ -)----- Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/ -)----- ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/ -)----- crh at ubiqx.mn.org
OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/ -)----- crh at ubiqx.org
More information about the samba-technical