[Samba] Re: Weird authentication difference between smbclient and smbmount

Carlos Rodrigues carlos.efr at mail.telepac.pt
Fri May 6 00:48:45 GMT 2005

Paul Gienger wrote:
> smbmount => not made here, please go talk to the kernel boys
> mount -t cifs often works better than mount -t smbfs.  Give that a try 
> and then go talk to the kernel boys if it's still broken.

I understand that smbfs supports some older SMB dialects that cifs 
doesn't, but why the need for two modules? Couldn't they be merged somehow?

Just saying this because the existence of two different ways of mounting 
smb shares, (apparently) very similar, is kind of confusing.

Just wanting some info.

Carlos Rodrigues

More information about the samba mailing list