Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 06 Nov 1997 17:09:21 -0500 | From | Steve Clark <> | Subject | Re: SMBFS & 2.1.62 (patch attached) |
| |
Bill,
I guess I only did a "make" instead of a "make zImage" and was using my previous kernel. This what I saw this time with your patch REALLY installed. I guess this would be simpler for me if I made smbfs a module.
/e_in_lab is a WFW3.11 share $ echo "abcacacacacacac" >/e_in_lab/test Nov 6 16:39:27 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_create: //test created, fileid=104 Nov 6 16:39:27 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_open: //test open failed, error=-26, retrying R/O $ ls -l /e_in_lab/test -rwxrwxrwx 1 sec users 0 Nov 6 16:46 /e_in_lab/test* NOTE file size is zero.
/tiger is Win95 share pc-sec:~ $ echo "abcacacacacacac" >/tiger/test Nov 6 16:41:03 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_create: //test created, fileid=399 pc-sec:~ $ ls -l /tiger/test -rwxrwxrwx 1 sec users 16 Nov 6 16:41 /tiger/test* NOTE file size looks correct.
Tried test again with different filename $ echo "abcacacacacacac" >/tiger/test2 Nov 6 16:42:10 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_create: //test2 created, fileid=401 $ ls -l /tiger/test2 -rwxrwxrwx 1 sec users 16 Nov 6 16:42 /tiger/test2* Everything looks good.
Now try WFW share again still a problem with new filename. $ echo "abcacacacacacac" >/e_in_lab/test2 Nov 6 16:42:41 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_create: //test2 created, fileid=107 Nov 6 16:42:41 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_open: //test2 open failed, error=-26, retrying R/O $ ls -l /e_in_lab/test2 -rwxrwxrwx 1 sec users 0 Nov 6 16:50 /e_in_lab/test2* Note: file size is zero.
Now try writing on filename created in first attempt above. $ echo "abcacacacacacac" >/e_in_lab/test bash: /e_in_lab/test: Permission denied Nov 6 16:55:28 pc-sec kernel: smb_proc_open: //test open failed, error=-26, retrying R/O
from my .config CONFIG_SMB_FS=y CONFIG_SMB_WIN95=y
Bill Hawes wrote:
> Hi Steve, > > My patch should have printed out the fileid after creating the file, > even if it's 0. Could you check and be sure your modules got updated, > and that a new one was loaded? (Do an lsmod and rmmod smbfs if > necessary.) > > Another person reports there's still a problem with Win 95, so I need to > check further. > > > There is another problem that I discovered it has to do with have the READ-ONLY attribute set on the Win95 or WFW3.11 file. > > On my linux system ls shows rwxrwxrwx for permissions. But if I try to update the file I get an errno-13 file access error. > > Is it possible for the ls command to show the file as read-only? > > Yes, ls is supposed to show the correct attributes, to the extent that > they can be mapped to the Unix way. I'll take a look and see how it's > handling that. > > Do you have the CONFIG_SMB_WIN95 option set? It affects how attributes > are requested for Win 95. > > Regards, > Bill
| |