On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:32:54 -0500 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes, IIRC the apple guys mentioned plausible server scenarios for this > (where we want to mount with unix extensions for symlinks and ownership > but server can not handle posix path names) > > Presumably if the server file system does not support posix path names > (FAT32, NTFS?) or if we want to restrict the characters (for interoperability > with Windows clients accessing the same share?) - might be other cases. > In that case though, shouldn't those servers just not set CIFS_UNIX_POSIX_PATHNAMES_CAP ? > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Is this mount option actually useful? Is there ever a case where we'd > > want to use unix extensions, but not use posix-style pathnames? If not, > > does it make sense to deprecate this option? > > > > -- > > Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > -- > > 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 > > > > > -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
