[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So my questions are:
>
> 1. Are there LFS requirements for SMB/CIFS or can I just drop the high-order
>portion of 64-bit file offsets?
There was a previous dicussion of the LFS/glibc issues, including
some Samba ones, at
http://www.scyld.com/products/beowulf/softwa
I have found that due to the way the macro definitions are used in the glibc
header files, it is not possible to know the size of structures that was used
in an independently-compiled application. libsmbclient, similarly, futzes
with internal macros to force the glibc definitions into mapping 32-b
David Collier-Brown -- Customer Engineering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> It appears I've nearly got it solved (unless another big problem turns up
>> after I fix this one). Aside from my initialization routine not be called
>> early enough, thus providing some null
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It appears I've nearly got it solved (unless another big problem turns up
> after I fix this one). Aside from my initialization routine not be called
> early enough, thus providing some null function pointers,
Hmmn, In a different discussion group I once wrote:
---
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'll scare up some time to try out your patch, and see if I can figure
> out what's special about the calls that are failing.
It appears I've nearly got it solved (unless another big problem turns up
after I fix this one). Aside from my initialization
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suspect the key change in the Debian build is enabling of LFS support;
Could be, but I have reimplemented each of the LFS functions that were in
there originally in a manner that they should work with the current C library.
I have discovered missing
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:54:52PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:27:07PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> >> I have smbwrapper and smbsh working on Debian/woody with the Linux 2.4
> >> kernel and the default C library: libc-2.2.5.so.
> > Yes, I'm interested
Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As a user, I welcome alternatives to smbfs.
Patch has been posted.
> (I'm also looking forward to trying out
> http://us1.samba.org/samba/Linux_CIFS_client.html)
I did minimal testing of it. It seems to work fine, as long as you don't need
to access anyt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:27:07PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> I have smbwrapper and smbsh working on Debian/woody with the Linux 2.4
>> kernel and the default C library: libc-2.2.5.so.
> Yes, I'm interested - please post patches. Pressure of other things
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:27:07PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have smbwrapper and smbsh working on Debian/woody with the Linux 2.4 kernel
and the default C library: libc-2.2.5.so. ...
Based on search results that I've found, there's been almost no work on
gettin
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:27:07PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have smbwrapper and smbsh working on Debian/woody with the Linux 2.4 kernel
> and the default C library: libc-2.2.5.so. There is a problem that rears its
> ugly head with a few programs (segmentation violation, presumably du
I have smbwrapper and smbsh working on Debian/woody with the Linux 2.4 kernel
and the default C library: libc-2.2.5.so. There is a problem that rears its
ugly head with a few programs (segmentation violation, presumably due to some
function which is not wrapped properly) but in general, and with
I tracked down a number of articles from the archives discussing the various
problems with smbsh for Linux. I am now getting much further than any of the
previous posters, but I could use some help.
Firstly, the problems with smbwrapper as shipped in Debian's package (2.2.3a)
are:
1. Although in
13 matches
Mail list logo
