Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Dec 2020 16:13:15 -0700
From:      Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>
To:        CerebrosuS <CerebrosuS@gmx.net>
Cc:        Daniel Ebdrup Jensen <debdrup@freebsd.org>,  "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Project information - SMBv2+
Message-ID:  <CAOtMX2jTvk0DXSLv%2Ba3xRSu5A9WMoniz3vFWu4D06VirMPA2Uw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <43C8B023-8DDF-4BA1-B9ED-483CB45B8E58@gmx.net>
References:  <20201230225624.atsnf6u5mmtcu5sw@nerd-thinkpad.local> <43C8B023-8DDF-4BA1-B9ED-483CB45B8E58@gmx.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I notice that smbnetfs is still using libfuse-2.  libfuse-3 uses a newer
protocol, with more features and better performance.  If you want to help
FreeBSD's SMB situation, your time might be more productively spent by
upgrading smbnetfs to libfuse-3.
-Alan

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 4:02 PM CerebrosuS <CerebrosuS@gmx.net> wrote:

> My experience with the fuse smbnetnfs is about a week old on FreeBSD 12.2=
.
>
> > Am 30.12.2020 um 23:56 schrieb Daniel Ebdrup Jensen <debdrup@freebsd.or=
g
> >:
> >
> > =EF=BB=BFOn Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wro=
te:
> >>> On 30/12/2020 20:24, CerebrosuS wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am 30.12.20 um 20:05 schrieb Miroslav Lachman:
> >>>> On 30/12/2020 18:57, CerebrosuS wrote:
> >>>>> Hello at all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the community and developer at FreeBSD seem to know, that SMBv1 for
> >>>>> clients is nearly over and that the included mount_smbfs doesn't
> support
> >>>>> newer versions. So good, so far...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So I can find multiple information about the situation, but no clea=
r
> >>>>> path on how FreeBSD community and developer will go on to solve thi=
s
> >>>>> missing function. (Just got the information on:
> >>>>>
> https://wiki.freebsd.org/MateuszPiotrowski/AccessingSmbSharesWithSambaCli=
ent
> )
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is what I am asking:
> >>>>> - Is there a project existing for solving this problem (with whatev=
er
> >>>>> target)?
> >>>>> - What is the way to go in future? Extend mount_smbfs or support th=
e
> >>>>> fuse-smbnetfs part to be stable and fast like mount_smbfs (buggy an=
d
> >>>>> laggy here)?
> >>>>> - Who is mainly working on it, if a project already exist?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'am just interested, cause of not finding such information clearly=
.
> Is
> >>>>> there maybe a general project management list / team to see what
> >>>>> projects are going on in whatever state?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am a hobby developer mainly coming from chemical engineering side=
,
> >>>>> having some time to help. I've already written some cross platform
> >>>>> software but never related to network or on os-level. So I am
> motivated
> >>>>> to invest some time in getting stuff into FreeBSD, but for me, ther=
e
> is
> >>>>> a lack on information (see above).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you in advance for information and help.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was involved in the thread linked by Gleb. AFAIK nothing changed
> from
> >>>> that time. I tried something from ports but it has more problems
> (shares
> >>>> cannot be mounted on boot like mount_smbfs does).
> >>>> If somebody has time and skills to try to bring SMBv2 or v3 to FreeB=
SD
> >>>> then Apple or Solaris sources is good start. The both were using the
> >>>> same mount_smbfs (v1) as FreeBSD so one can check their sources and
> see
> >>>> how they evolve to v2 / v3.
> >>>
> >>> They are both using exactly the same source code as a starting point
> and
> >>> extend it (or rewrite it) to SMBv2?
> >>
> >> They are based on the ported code. Apple Mac OS X and Solaris have
> different kernel so they needed modified port of the same code as was in
> FreeBSD back in the days (there is the same copyright header). Apple
> sources or Solaris sources cannot be used directly on FreeBSD but some
> skilled developer can look in to those sources to see their evolution. Bu=
t
> as was already noted v2 and v3 are very different from v1. It will be har=
d
> to port but not impossible.
> >> Current solutions in ports (fusefs) are almost useless in server
> environment.
> >>
> >> Miroslav Lachman
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
> freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Assuming that the reasons for not using fuse in a server environment ar=
e
> related primarily to performance and that the implementation that was in
> base used to be quite out-of-date, has this at all been reevalulated sinc=
e
> a new version was merged? [1]
> >
> > Yours,
> > Daniel Ebdrup Jensen
> >
> > [1]: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/350665
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org=
"
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2jTvk0DXSLv%2Ba3xRSu5A9WMoniz3vFWu4D06VirMPA2Uw>