[Samba] Re: New maintainer needed for the Linux smb filesystem

[Thomas Bork]

Steven French wrote:

> Surprisingly NT4 still has a huge installed base, and cifs vfs did not
> support it reasonably well until version 1.30 of the cifs vfs (which is
> less than a year ago).   Win9x/WinME has a large installed base as well,
> but is somewhat less important as a server, and would be fairly easy to
> support if I added the old "dos" style time conversion routines.  I think
> it would take less than two weeks to do (add support for Win9x and WinME to
> cifs, a couple missing transact2 infolevels, and turning on the insecure
> lanman hash again), but is lower priority than Kerberos support.

I think the lack of Win9x/Me support is the biggest showstopper for a 
wide replacing of smbfs.

der tom