On 6/3/2011 12:37 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 21:36:01 +0530
Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/03/2011 06:41 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 12:06:19 +0530
Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
When ntlm security mechanim is used, the message that warns about the upgrade
to ntlmv2 got the kernel release version wrong (Blame it on Linus :). Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx>
---
fs/cifs/connect.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c
index 6d88b82..84c7307 100644
--- a/fs/cifs/connect.c
+++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c
@@ -1976,7 +1976,7 @@ cifs_get_smb_ses(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, struct smb_vol *volume_info)
warned_on_ntlm = true;
cERROR(1, "default security mechanism requested. The default "
"security mechanism will be upgraded from ntlm to "
- "ntlmv2 in kernel release 2.6.41");
+ "ntlmv2 in kernel release 3.1");
}
ses->overrideSecFlg = volume_info->secFlg;
Looks good. Though I'm not sure whether we should call it 3.1.0?
Regardless...
I thought about this. But, as Linus has already said:
"Now, my alpha-maleness sadly does not actually extend to all the
scripts and Makefile rules, so the kernel is fighting back, and is
calling itself 3.0.0-rc1. We'll have the usual 6-7 weeks to wrestle it
into submission, and get scripts etc cleaned up, and the final release
should be just "3.0". The -stable team can use the third number for
their versioning."
I think 3.1 should be ok?
Pity -- would have been sort of nice to always use a 3 field version
number since the stable kernels will need that, but...not my call.
Either way, patch is fine.
I think 3.0 was being called 3.0.0 officially because some scripts broke
without a "major.minor.revision" scheme. At least for the moment,
according to Linus' commit message.
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=55922c9d1b84b89cb946c777fddccb3247e7df2c
--
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
