Metze, > are you ok with r14256?
The structures are definately better, but it seems to be failing quite a few tests :-) for example, RAW-UNLINK is failing. I'm pretty sure it was this patch that causes it, but I haven't worked out how yet. > the idea with this is that I'll later add struct ntvfs_handle *ntvfs to > smb_handle, so that the ntvfs subsystem doesn't need to know about fnum > or smb2_handle. oh, ok! So you'll have an idtree hanging off the session that maps the fnum to the ntvfs_handle, then fill that in on calls that take a handle? The only slightly tricky bit will be calls that can take a 'wildcard' handle. For example, SMBflush can take a handle of 0xFFFF meaning "flush all open handles". We handle that in the backend at the moment. Apart from that, I think this is a good idea. Cheers, Tridge
