> > but my 2.4 config is here: > > # > > # Network File Systems > > # > > ... > > CONFIG_SMB_FS=m > > CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT=y > > CONFIG_SMB_NLS_REMOTE="utf8" > > CONFIG_SMB_UNIX=y > > I think your Linux vendor has patched your sources. Because if I look > in the original sources
I compile myself my kernels from original sources. > (http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/defconfig?v=2.4.26) there is no > such option. This because "CONFIG_SMB_FS is not set". Check the _original_ source: $ ls -l linux-2.4.26/fs/smbfs/proc.c -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 83490 Apr 14 15:05 linux-2.4.26/fs/smbfs/proc.c $ Its content: int smb_newconn(struct smb_sb_info *server, struct smb_conn_opt *opt) { ... #ifndef CONFIG_SMB_UNIX server->opt.capabilities &= ~SMB_CAP_UNIX; #endif if (server->opt.capabilities & SMB_CAP_UNIX) { struct inode *inode; VERBOSE("Using UNIX CIFS extensions\n"); install_ops(server->ops, &smb_ops_unix); inode = SB_of(server)->s_root->d_inode; if (inode) inode->i_op = &smb_dir_inode_operations_unix; } linux-2.4.26/fs/smbfs/Changelog writes: 2004-01-24 John Newbigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * *.c: Implementation of CIFS Extensions for UNIX systems > such option. On the other hand, it doesn't make clear why several > options need to be ignored. I've no inten^H^H^Hformation to answer this question. ;-) I just pointed out that you CAN achieve identical (however unwanted) behavior of 2.4 and 2.6 smbfs implementation. Gabor -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba