Not entirely true i'am afraid. The issues i spoke of in an earlier post occured with the kernel module ( mount -t smbfs .... ). Would using the CIFS module work better or is still too experimental ? (those experimental flags say nothing, devfs is also experimental but i neaver heard anyone complaining).
Mvg den_RDC On Tuesday 05 August 2003 22:14, Aubin Paul wrote: > On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 02:02:35PM -0600, Eric Jorgensen wrote: > > Linux is an excellent samba *server. It's not such a good client. It's > > actually a pretty lousy client. the samba client is ftp-like in nature. > > Unless you compile in smbfs.o in the kernel and mount the drive. Then > your Linux box accesses Samba just like any other network filesystem. > > Aubin > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including > Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. > Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. > http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 > _______________________________________________ > Freevo-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-users ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Freevo-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-users
