I would like opinions on how to handle a specific use question ... if the user has mounted e.g. \\server1\shareA (e.g. on a Samba server) using defaults (and thus gotten support for the Unix Extensions, but then does a second mount trying to disable Unix Extensions (e.g. "mount -t cifs //server1/shareB /mnt -o nounix" then what should the result be: 1) mount fails? If so what return code - there is no easy way to pass error strings back across mount (get_sb returns an int - a posix return code) 2) mount succeeds, ignoring the "nounix" option but prints a warning to dmesg 3) mount succeeds but turns off the Unix Capability bits so no Unix Extension requests are sent on either shareA or shareB (although the server behavior will still be a little different than if the client had not negotiated Unix Extensions at all, at least it will be different unless the session drops and is reconnected at which time the server will see the Unix Extensions disabled) 4) mount succeeds and no Unix Extension requests are sent on the tree id for shareB (the requests to shareA are unaffected) etc. Ideas? On 7/16/07, Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have seen various requests from users to disable part of the CIFS Unix Extensions on mount
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
