Steven French wrote: > > Good question - at some point I need to look at that. Clearly the > structure is quite a bit different between the two. Most visibly the mount > code is in kernel in mine (I have no mount helper yet as smbfs does - I was > planning on adding some tcp name to ip address resolution code in the Samba > utility "net" though so it could do a "net use" more gracefully). I > noticed that smbfs is getting some activity - e.g. I saw that Unicode > patches were added to smbfs so that is no longer a difference between the > two. Another difference is that I have hardlink support - to be precise > I added native Windows hardlink support in the cifs vfs and 1/2 implemented > symbolic links (via windows style reparse points - the reparse points are > detected but the follow link is not working). I don't implement the Unix > extensions yet but will - I had focused on finding Windows equivalents for > the Unix extensions which is harder than it sounds but important since > Windows does not implement the Unix extensions. > > A few other differneces - the cifs vfs uses native ip addresses and either > 445 or the RFC1001 port rather than netbios naming as smbfs's helper uses.
smbfs is port-agnostic. smbmount just uses normal samba code for the tree connect, and as such already has support for both 139 and 445 semantics. > smbfs is quite a bit more stable and has reasonable backlevel > interoperability (which is not a goal of the cifs vfs). The cifs vfs is > designed only for those compliant with the SNIA CIFS Technical Reference or > later to simplify the testing and maximize the Linux->Samba and > Linux->Windows2000/XP/.NetServer function. I had hoped that in some > sense it could serve as a "reference implementation" for the SNIA > specification. Over time function between the two will probably diverge > quite a bit more. I wanted to be much more aggressive in adding function > and in design risks in the cifs vfs (ie more aggressive than I guessed we > would be able to do in the smbfs which people rely on today to be stable) > e.g. in adding function such as access control and Kerberos integration. Apart from the 'sombody killed my conn' issue, the issue that prevents kerberos intergration in smbfs is NTSTATUS support - again, becouse it uses the samba mount-time helper. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
