On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 06:09:45PM +0100, Ralph Böhme wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:03:41AM -0800, Jeremy Allison via samba-technical wrote: > > Maybe. Changing meta-data semantics on write is fraught with danger, > > and we don't even do that for SMB1 unix extensions. So let's not > > add contraints we don't understand yet please. > > > > My money is on a client bug, as always :-). > > fwiw, just in case you were not aware of this one: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13594 Yeah I knew about that. But the detail here is: "We basically implement the behavior of Windows 2000:" which means we were right at one point :-). > We also seem to have a bug that a set-eof on a handle with > set-eof-size=existing-size doesn't flush a pending write time update. At > least newer Windows server seem to do that. Bug number ? BTW I'm a big fan of making us the same as recent Windows versions (that's what most clients will be testing against), I just don't want to change our behavior for UNIX extensions. That way lies madness :-).
