Messages in this thread | | | From | "Muzaffer Kal" <> | Subject | RE: Useless smbfs ! | Date | Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:10:27 -0700 |
| |
this is what I get: # for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10; do ls | wc -w; done 1433 1433 1433 1433 1433...
The result I get from "dir /b \\foo\c\dir | wc -w" on my NT machine to the same share is 1433 too.
To accomplish this I had to patch smbfs files. Here is a message I posted to comp.os.linux.networking:
I have a found post in comp.os.linux.networking which has a patch which seems to work. Search in dejanews a subject "smbfs "win95 bug workaround"". The patch suggested in the post you will find worked for me too and some other person apparently. If you want to hear from me here is what you need to do: (sorry I don't have a diff) open $(top)/src/linux/fs/smbfs/proc.c find the #ifdef CONFIG_SMB_WIN95 line. just after this #ifdef/#endif pair there is a closing brace, IOW, this pair is in the body of an else statement. Just move the brace to the top of this pair so that the pair is not in the else block anymore. Be sure to have this workaround selected in config and recompile. For me this worked.
I am assuming someone can generate a patch which would do this for the current version of the kernel. Sorry I can't do it because I am running 2.0.35 only.
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu > [mailto:owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu]On Behalf Of Bill Hawes > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 9:20 AM > To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu > Subject: Re: Useless smbfs ! > > > Fuzzy Fox wrote: > > > Anyway, MY reason for proclaiming SMBFS to be silly, is > this: Try it > > yourself! > > > > % cd WINDOWS # or any large directory > > > > % for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10; do; echo * | wc -w; done > > 337 > > 275 > > 272 > > 177 > > 1 > > 274 > > 17 > > 92 > > 271 > > 84 > > > > Now, does this make ANY sense at all? I say it does not. > And yes, I do > > have CONFIG_SMB_WIN95 turned on. The system "Windy" above > is a Win98 > > box. > > > > Does anyone have a system where this does NOT happen? I would be > > surprised to find anyone who can get a stable, repeatable directory > > listing which actually contains ALL files in a large directory. > > Directory listings of any size work fine on WNT servers. > > You might want to try _not_ using the w95 workarounds with > w98; it's possible M$ > may have fixed a few things. > > Regards, > Bill > > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe > linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |