Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Richard Sharpe wrote: Hmmm, I don't think that any do yet. I expect to be looking at smbclient and will try to put the code into libsmb, but that is still an issue for things like smbfs, I believe because of the amount of junk that might get dragged in. Regarding smbfs support (I have just browsed the SNIA(?) docs on that and don't know anything beyond they few lines I have read ...) On some operations trying to access a directory which is really on a different server (or share?) an error code is returned, right?. What smbfs could do then is simply to mount that other directory on itself (would work sort of like autofs or maybe even with the help of autofs). To connect to the other server smbfs would call on smbmount and the amount of junk needed in kernel space would be kept to a minimum. But maybe there is more to dfs than that. I have however no immediate plans to do this. Also, if cifsfs when released is better than smbfs (faster, more stable, with dfs support, etc) it should replace it and work on smbfs features would be a waste of time. There was some comment on this list that the source for the cifsfs module would be made available on the samba ftp. Is it now? /Urban
Re: Microsoft's Dfs - GPL LICENSE ISSUE
David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: It is GPL code. I don't think it can be used in the FreeBSD kernel (correct me if I'm wrong Steve). I don't think this will be a problem. We currently have a GPL math emulator in our kernel, just not enabled by default options GPL_MATH_EMULATE#Support for x87 emulation via #new math emulator If it can be loaded as a kernel module it will be even less of a problem, but I don't know the specifics about the program in question. Uhmm that's not entirely true. There is a problem. When you distribute a kernel in which that module has been linked (statically or dynamically) you have to release the whole kernel under the GPL terms if you distribute it in binary form Even if it has been dynamically linked after the fact and the kernel was not originally distributed with this module? That depends on how you distribute it. If dynamically linking is up to the user, an optional feature, then no. If the module is required for the device to perform it's most basic function, then it is a necessary part of the device as a whole. The GPL has a lot words crafted around this concept, but since the authors of the GPL did not write what they mean in clear language, virtually any legal interpretation is possible. It is not likely that a court will draw any legal distinctions between the technicalities of static vs. dynamic linking, but rather on whether the code is a required or optional part of the device functionality. Or said legal counsel for my last employer, which produced an embedded software platform based on OpenBSD. I have seen the same opinion from other legal sources who have studied the GPL with respect to embedded systems. (you must distribute the source of the whole kernel or offer a written offer to give the source at no cost but that of the medium). not doing so or offering only the GPL code part as source would be a copyright violation of the owners of the code of the module. How does this gpl program differ from the gpl math emulator we distribute with our kernel? It's completely optional, and not needed for the device, i.e. a web server, to function. Also, FreeBSD is the product itself, not the system. -- Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket? Wes Peters Softweyr LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://softweyr.com/
Re: Microsoft's Dfs - GPL LICENSE ISSUE
On 2002-05-30 07:27 -0500, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: It is GPL code. I don't think it can be used in the FreeBSD kernel (correct me if I'm wrong Steve). I don't think this will be a problem. We currently have a GPL math emulator in our kernel, just not enabled by default options GPL_MATH_EMULATE#Support for x87 emulation via #new math emulator If it can be loaded as a kernel module it will be even less of a problem, but I don't know the specifics about the program in question. Uhmm that's not entirely true. There is a problem. When you distribute a kernel in which that module has been linked (statically or dynamically) you have to release the whole kernel under the GPL terms if you distribute it in binary form Even if it has been dynamically linked after the fact and the kernel was not originally distributed with this module? Pardon my somewhat flamebait-like style, but bullfeathers. Greg Lehey has researched this exact topic a bit more, and his views, backed up with some statements by Richard Stallman, can be found in an old article of daemonnews. It makes things pretty clear, and you can find it at: http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200202/dadvocate.html - Giorgos
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
Can anyone point me to any documentation on the internals of Microsoft's Dfs? Better yet, does anyone know of a unix/linux client that understands DFS ? -- Ken
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Ken Stone wrote: Can anyone point me to any documentation on the internals of Microsoft's Dfs? Better yet, does anyone know of a unix/linux client that understands DFS ? Hmmm, I don't think that any do yet. I expect to be looking at smbclient and will try to put the code into libsmb, but that is still an issue for things like smbfs, I believe because of the amount of junk that might get dragged in. Regards - Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
I think Steve French's cifsfs module for linux does understand dfs. I don't know where to get it though. On Wed, 29 May 2002, Ken Stone wrote: Can anyone point me to any documentation on the internals of Microsoft's Dfs? Better yet, does anyone know of a unix/linux client that understands DFS ? Hmmm, I don't think that any do yet. I expect to be looking at smbclient and will try to put the code into libsmb, but that is still an issue for things like smbfs, I believe because of the amount of junk that might get dragged in. Regards - Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Jim McDonough wrote: I think Steve French's cifsfs module for linux does understand dfs. I don't know where to get it though. Yes, I agree. I recall him talking about this. I guess I was referring to released stuff. It should be available *very* soon... Great ... Has it been checked on FreeBSD? If not, if you give me the source, I will check it for you. Regards - Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 06:06:52AM +0930, Richard Sharpe wrote: On Wed, 29 May 2002, Jim McDonough wrote: I think Steve French's cifsfs module for linux does understand dfs. I don't know where to get it though. Yes, I agree. I recall him talking about this. I guess I was referring to released stuff. It should be available *very* soon... Great ... Has it been checked on FreeBSD? If not, if you give me the source, I will check it for you. If it can be made into a freebsd port, I don't mind doing the work. It just depends if it builds a kernel module or not. -- David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Raintree Network Services, Inc. www.inethouston.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD Committer www.FreeBSD.org
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 06:06:52AM +0930, Richard Sharpe wrote: Has it been checked on FreeBSD? If not, if you give me the source, I will check it for you. It is GPL code. I don't think it can be used in the FreeBSD kernel (correct me if I'm wrong Steve). Jeremy.
Re: Microsoft's Dfs
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 12:43:51PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 06:06:52AM +0930, Richard Sharpe wrote: Has it been checked on FreeBSD? If not, if you give me the source, I will check it for you. It is GPL code. I don't think it can be used in the FreeBSD kernel (correct me if I'm wrong Steve). I don't think this will be a problem. We currently have a GPL math emulator in our kernel, just not enabled by default options GPL_MATH_EMULATE#Support for x87 emulation via #new math emulator If it can be loaded as a kernel module it will be even less of a problem, but I don't know the specifics about the program in question. -- David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Raintree Network Services, Inc. www.inethouston.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD Committer www.FreeBSD.org
