On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:16:22PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > From: Dave Jones > Already posted at http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/7/7/255 I had to stop and think if this was an April 1st :) Back in 2005 it seemed I had a strong enough stomach to wade through smbfs for some unknown reason. These days like many others, I wish someone would just put the thing out of its misery. In Fedora we switched it off (in about 2005 iirc) in favor of using cifs, which for the most part is a drop-in replacement. There still remain 1-2 corner cases where it doesn't work iirc, but the situation is a lot better than it used to be. As to whether the patch is worthwhile/correct.. I really don't know. I posted it back then in the hopes that someone smbfs-savvy would pop up and review it. As you can see from the archive, no-one did. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -
| Adrian Bunk | Re: Linux 2.6.21 |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.21-rc2 |
| WANG Cong | [-mm Patch] UML: fix a building error |
| Roland McGrath | Re: [PATCH 0/5] ftrace: to kill a daemon |
git: | |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Patrick McHardy | Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3) |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Theodore Ts'o | Re: cc1 fails silently |
| Michael Nolan | Power routines on notebook cause kernel panic |
| Marc Peters | v 0.11 boot disk problem |
| Dave `geek' Gymer | WARNING (was Re: New afio release) |
