On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 09:39:01AM +0100, Patrik Gustavsson wrote: > Well, you should know. > > But if Samba is doing byte ranged lock using fcntl, then > I don't understand why my tests failed. > > The first test I did was: > > I simulated a NFS client and did byte range lock on a file, > a document in this case 8K in size, and tried to open that from > client using Samba and it failed becuse is was locked. > > The second test I did was: > > When a client opened the file using samba, with a > DENY_WRITE lock (output from smbstatus) and I used the same simulated > NFS client that did a byte range write lock using fcntl() on that > document. > I would assume that the byte range lock would fail, but it didn't it > succeeded. > > That surprised me.
You're confusing share modes with byte range locks. Read up on share modes - smbstatus doesn't report byte range locks, only share modes. Until you understand the difference we're not really communicating :-). At all :-). Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
