Erast Benson wrote: > On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 15:52 -0800, Afshin Salek wrote: >> Here are the CRs about the problem: >> >> 6800211 CIFS server does not respond to the Windows client request to map > > could you please give us more details on what FVT test is failing? >
Since you have to access a share before [virtually] doing anything, most tests would fail. Specifically, if you map a share from one client you would not be able to map a share from another client. Mapping would fail and the CIFS service will be restarted which you might not notice. >> 6800942 smb_session_create() incorrectly stores IP addresses > > this one is trivial to fix though, but could it be that it is causing > 6800211? > Yes, it is the cause and it's mentioned in the Evaluation of the 6800211. We already have a fix but it would go to snv_109 since snv_108 is already closed. Afshin > Thank you > >> Afshin >> >> Afshin Salek wrote: >>> Due to a regression w.r.t one of the CIFS fixes integrated in snv_108, >>> you will certainly run into problem accessing shares in this build so >>> if you are planning to upgrade, please skip this build. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Afshin >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cifs-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss >> _______________________________________________ >> cifs-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss >> > _______________________________________________ cifs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss
