This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
Date:
Kevin A. Pieckiel enscribed thusly:
> Hi everyone,
> I know I read this information somewhere, but I can't find it now. I'm using
> Samba 2.0.3 and I'm mounting NT Server 4.0 SP3 shares. When I access them,
> the time/date stamps are hosed with dates in 2042 and 1937 and stuff. I
> *THOUGHT* I read somewhere that there is a patch for this, but I can't for
> the life of me find it. Can someone give me some help, please? I'd like
> to get this problem fixed...
Seen that... You probably compiled your kernel with the WIN95
bug workaround. Turn that sucker OFF! If you are not accessing WIN95
shares EXCLUSIVELY this will cause you no end of grief. If you are
mounting only NT shares, you don't need it and it causes these errors.
If you are mounting a gmix gmash of both, there is a way to deal with
this at mount time with the latest smbfs and smbmount (the Samba version,
2.1.70 kernels and above). The run time option is NOT pretty (you have
to add a large octal constant to the directory permissions) but it works
until I find time to add some enhancements to smbmount...
Kevin A. Pieckiel enscribed thusly:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> -> Seen that... You probably compiled your kernel with the WIN95
> -> bug workaround. Turn that sucker OFF! If you are not accessing WIN95
> -> shares EXCLUSIVELY this will cause you no end of grief. If you are
> -> mounting only NT shares, you don't need it and it causes these errors.
> -> If you are mounting a gmix gmash of both, there is a way to deal with
> -> this at mount time with the latest smbfs and smbmount (the Samba version,
> -> 2.1.70 kernels and above). The run time option is NOT pretty (you have
> -> to add a large octal constant to the directory permissions) but it works
> -> until I find time to add some enhancements to smbmount...
> Yes, I use Win95 bug workaround. I mount mostly WinNT shares, but I do
> mount Win95 shares on occasion as needed. Since I am using kernel 2.2.2,
> I assume I'm using the latest smbfs drivers. Since I am using Samba 2.0.3,
> I assume I'm using the latest smbmount program. What is the best option?
> Should I disable Win95 bug workaround or use your octal constant? What
> does the Win95 bug workaround do? Do I really need it?
If you have a mix of Windows NT shares and Windows 95 shares you
have no choice but to disable the workaround in the kernel options and
use the octal constant (01000 on the file mode) or to put up with the trashed
timestamps on NT. If you don't use the workaround on the Windows 95 shares,
you get other problems. I've seen blocks of names in directory listings
totally dropped and one of my cohorts-in-crime on the Samba team says that
there is a timing problem where you could hand a Windows 95 session because
Windows 95 can handle requests at the rate we can issue them.
I think I posted an error in a previous message and had adding the
01000 option on the -d parameter. That is incorrect (that's the debug
option to smbmount and the directory mode option for the embedded mount
command - don't ask - I have no idea why I hit that key). It's the
"-f" option that is buried in the -c "mount {mount_point}..." parameter.