On Tuesday 13 March 2007 12:12 am, James D. Parra wrote:
I'm connecting to our windows' shares using names instead IP addresses
using cifs and not experiencing any problems (Suse 9.1 -10.0).
What is it that can't be done using cifs? One thing I noticed that I prefer
using cifs over smbfs is
Paul Abrahams wrote:
I have hostnames on my LAN that smbfs can resolve but cifs cannot. The
answer use a fixed IP address is not very satisfying if you're running
fully dynamic DHCP.
Could you define what you mean by fully dynamic DHCP? If your DHCP
server is changing IP addresses
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 8:27 pm, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
Could you define what you mean by fully dynamic DHCP? If your DHCP
server is changing IP addresses constantly, even if it is updating the
DNS server, it is misconfigured. It will give out the same IP to the
same NIC every time,
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 22:13, Paul Abrahams wrote:
In fact I have fixed IP addresses assigned using my router's DHCP
configuration page, but I don't like the idea of counting on that -- it just
seems unnecessarily rigid.
Try not to think of static reservations as a rigid method of
Mandag 12 marts 2007 00:47 skrev Felix Miata:
On 2007/03/11 00:47 (GMT-0900) John Andersen apparently typed:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing
On Saturday 10 March 2007 10:38 pm, Kai Ponte wrote:
On Saturday 10 March 2007 06:07:37 am [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
type smbfs isn't supported by the kernel
that's a error message that i get from
when i launch this commad smbmount //10.126.12.41/xxx /mnt/xxx -o
username=xxx
no
On Sunday 11 March 2007 5:47 am, John Andersen wrote:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing it lacks IIRC is the ability to mount a
windows 9X share
On Monday 12 March 2007 2:22 pm, I wrote:
Avoid the cifs bleeding-edge solution for now. Some day
it may be the way to go.
One more thought. There's nothing to stop you from installing both cifs and
the older smbfs. You can mount cifs with the mount.cifs command. I suppose
that if it
On Monday 12 March 2007, Paul Abrahams wrote:
Not so. There are some problems with host name resolution in cifs that don't
occur with smbfs. I experienced them.
Come to mention it, I seem to have seen the same thing, and had to put
IP numbers in my cifs mount lines if fstab.
Of course, I
On Monday 12 March 2007, Paul Abrahams wrote:
On Monday 12 March 2007 2:22 pm, I wrote:
Avoid the cifs bleeding-edge solution for now. Some day
it may be the way to go.
One more thought. There's nothing to stop you from installing both cifs and
the older smbfs. You can mount cifs
On Monday 12 March 2007 9:54 pm, John Andersen wrote:
So why the hell did Suse decide to outright DROP smbfs is they can
co-exist? You would think they would put both in and solicit community
feedback on which ones work better and what the problems were?
Isn't that the purpose of opensuse?
On Monday 12 March 2007 9:54 pm, John Andersen wrote:
So why the hell did Suse decide to outright DROP smbfs is they can
co-exist? You would think they would put both in and solicit community
feedback on which ones work better and what the problems were?
Isn't that the purpose of opensuse?
Kai Ponte wrote:
I don't have 10.2 yet - and am not going at all until this is fixed - but
I've
read on this and other lists that SMB was somehow deleted from SUSE at that
version and replaced with something inferior.
It was supposed to be replaced by cifs, which is smbfs embraced and
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing it lacks IIRC is the ability to mount a
windows 9X share on the Linux machine.
Mounting WinNT/2K/XP/Vista shares
Søndag 11 marts 2007 10:47 skrev John Andersen:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing it lacks IIRC is the ability to mount a
windows 9X share on the
Søndag 11 marts 2007 11:08 skrev Verner Kjærsgaard:
Søndag 11 marts 2007 10:47 skrev John Andersen:
I use CIFS to mount a couple of SMB shares from my central file server into
my laptop. I used to be able to run a script as an ordinary user (having
chmod +2 some smbmount files) to accomplish
On Sunday 11 March 2007, Verner Kjærsgaard wrote:
Søndag 11 marts 2007 10:47 skrev John Andersen:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing it lacks
Søndag 11 marts 2007 11:27 skrev John Andersen:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, Verner Kjærsgaard wrote:
Søndag 11 marts 2007 10:47 skrev John Andersen:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and
is lacking some
On 2007/03/11 00:47 (GMT-0900) John Andersen apparently typed:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, David Brodbeck wrote:
Unfortunately it seems cifs isn't quite ready for primetime yet and is
lacking some functionality that's in smbfs.
The only thing it lacks IIRC is the ability to mount a
windows
On Sunday 11 March 2007, Felix Miata wrote:
One can mount an OS/2 share
Let it die in peace Felix.
;-)
--
_
John Andersen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2007/03/11 20:32 (GMT-0400) John Andersen apparently typed:
On Sunday 11 March 2007, Felix Miata wrote:
One can mount an OS/2 share
Let it die in peace Felix.
;-)
Can't, because it won't. Next release is in 3rd or 4th beta, probably due
before June.
On the bright side, we've
type smbfs isn't supported by the kernel
that's a error message that i get from
when i launch this commad smbmount //10.126.12.41/xxx /mnt/xxx -o
username=xxx
no problem with the password ... coz im sure it is rite
overall good feature of 10.2, esp its visual graphic
--
To unsubscribe,
Lørdag 10 marts 2007 15:07 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
type smbfs isn't supported by the kernel
that's a error message that i get from
when i launch this commad smbmount //10.126.12.41/xxx /mnt/xxx -o
username=xxx
no problem with the password ... coz im sure it is rite
overall good feature
On Saturday 10 March 2007 06:07:37 am [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
type smbfs isn't supported by the kernel
that's a error message that i get from
when i launch this commad smbmount //10.126.12.41/xxx /mnt/xxx -o
username=xxx
no problem with the password ... coz im sure it is rite
overall
24 matches
Mail list logo
