On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:31:25PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:22:50 -0600 > Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:10:12 -0400 > > > Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Steve, can you clarify where we are with this patch? I originally sent > > > this back in June. You and I discussed this at the CIFS plugfest and I > > > had thought you had decided to merge it. It's still not in your tree > > > however. Can you give a verdict on whether you're going to merge it and > > > let me know when I can expect to see it in your tree if so? > > > > > > > > Thanks for reminding me. I had forgotten to ask JRA about a question > > on legacy Samba behavior. I remembered that older Samba > > had problems with creation time - and was trying to remember what > > the implication of using this patch with older Samba was. > > > > All samba versions have issues with create times (at least on Linux > anyway). They fake them, by using the ctime (which seems like an odd > choice to me) in most cases. New Samba's store create time in an xattr, so they can return a reasonably valid create time value. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
