Keith G. Murphy
keithmur at mindspring.com
Wed Sep 29 14:30:01 GMT 1999
tridge at linuxcare.com wrote:
> > Any chance we could ever see some *cooperation* between the smbfs people
> > (person?) and the Samba people?
> yes :)
> I took over as maintainer of smbfs recently, so there is definately
> some cooperation now! My problem has been lack of time to put into it.
> I spent a couple of days rewriting smbmount from scratch for the 2.0.5
> release of Samba and also fixed all the kernel bugs I knew of for the
> 2.2.10 kernel. Unfortunately I forgot to document the changes in
> smbmount before the 2.0.5a release.
> I just spent the last weekend working on more smbmount stuff, and I
> have documented it ready for 2.0.6 (due soon). You can now mount smbfs
> with ordinary mount like this:
> mount -t smb //fjall/data /data/foo -o username=tridge,password=foobar
*Yes*!!! Does this also mean we can forget about smbumount also? Half
the time, you'd have to clean up behind it with umount anyway...
> You can also put smb in filesystems /etc/fstab. My next job is some
> more kernel smbfs stuff.
> > There seems to be some bitchiness, NIH syndrome, or something going
> > on.
> the big problem was that noone on the team actually used smbfs. When I
> joined Linuxcare I volunteered to take it on. I still don't use it
> much, but I do test it before releases.
> > The Samba FAQ even mentions smbfs as a "constant cause of
> > complaint".
> I'll fix that.
That (all you've said, not just the last part) is the best news I have
heard in quite some time! Thank you very much. :-)
More information about the samba