linux-kernel - Re: [2.6 patch] remove smbfs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:16:13 +0100
From:	Guenter Kukkukk <linux@...kukk.com>
To:	samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] remove smbfs

Am Montag, 28. Januar 2008 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
> I remember that there were some small things missing in CIFS for 
> completely replacing the unmaintained smbfs when we discussed removing 
> smbfs back in 2005 due to smbfs being unmaintained.
> 
> CIFS has improved since, smbfs is still unmaintained, and it's becoming 
> time to finally remove smbfs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
> 

"... unmaintained smbfs ..." is not quite right, see
   http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/6/94
Before removing it now completely, drop
  Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
a note.
Afaik, Redhat still has customers which rely on smbfs.

In addition, cifs cannot completely replace smbfs atm.
Even todays sold NAS-boxes (often running anchient 
samba-2.x.x) work only with smbfs on the client side.
Cheers, Günter 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/