Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Chris Smith
On Friday 01 February 2008, Felix Miata wrote: If you have Win9x and/or OS/2 shares on your network, you'll need to recompile your SUSE kernel to include SMBFS support to provide acceptable access to those shares. I think cifs should be able to work in those cases, but I can't personally

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/02/19 12:54 (GMT-0500) Chris Smith apparently typed: On Friday 01 February 2008, Felix Miata wrote: If you have Win9x and/or OS/2 shares on your network, you'll need to recompile your SUSE kernel to include SMBFS support to provide acceptable access to those shares. I think cifs

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Volker Lendecke
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:23:02PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: I think cifs should be able to work in those cases... Someday that may be true, but today it can't. There is at least one open time stamping bug that makes the connections worthless. Getting such bugs fixed is easier said than

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Chris Smith
On Tuesday 19 February 2008, Felix Miata wrote: There is at least one open time stamping bug that makes the connections worthless. Wondering which OS's exactly. Is it just OS2? Or Windows 95? Or Windows 98? Or Windows ME? -- Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/02/19 20:54 (GMT+0100) Volker Lendecke apparently typed: On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:23:02PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: I think cifs should be able to work in those cases... Someday that may be true, but today it can't. There is at least one open time stamping bug that makes the

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Volker Lendecke
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 04:51:36PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: This is the first such request I've actually seen, though Guenter Kukkukk mentioned it on IRC last week. To make it happen, your specifications for access need to get into the hands of those in a position to answer your request. This

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-19 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/02/19 23:09 (GMT+0100) Volker Lendecke apparently typed: I'll see if we can assemble something out of these URLs Depending on what access actually means, an announcement submitted to the first URL I listed might be enough. without too much budget... For example on the ecomstation

[Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-01 Thread Trimble, Ronald D
Hello, I have the following Samba RPMs installed... samba-client-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-pdb-3.0.26a-0.5 yast2-samba-server-2.9.33-0.3 kdebase3-samba-3.2.1-68.62 samba-winbind-3.0.26a-0.5 yast2-samba-client-2.9.18-0.3 samba-python-3.0.26a-0.5 I used to

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-01 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/02/01 10:59 (GMT-0600) Trimble, Ronald D apparently typed: I have the following Samba RPMs installed... samba-client-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-pdb-3.0.26a-0.5 yast2-samba-server-2.9.33-0.3 kdebase3-samba-3.2.1-68.62 samba-winbind-3.0.26a-0.5

Re: [Samba] Problem with SMBFS vs CIFS

2008-02-01 Thread Adam Williams
use mount -t cifs Trimble, Ronald D wrote: Hello, I have the following Samba RPMs installed... samba-client-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-3.0.26a-0.5 samba-pdb-3.0.26a-0.5 yast2-samba-server-2.9.33-0.3 kdebase3-samba-3.2.1-68.62 samba-winbind-3.0.26a-0.5 yast2-samba-client-2.9.18-0.3