Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:15:25 +0200 From: Niek Bergboer <niek@bergboer.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: smbfs: disconnected servers Message-ID: <20010605141525.D66239@wit379119.student.utwente.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106051206480.71432-100000@lion.butya.kz>; from bp@butya.kz on Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 12:17:03PM %2B0700 References: <20010530103558.A31220@wit379119.student.utwente.nl> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106051206480.71432-100000@lion.butya.kz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
When exactly has this funcionality (both 1 and 2) been implemented?
Since the latest MFC (the one that required LIBICONV and MCHAINS in
the kernel config)? Or has it been around longer?
Niek
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 12:17:03PM +0700, Boris Popov wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2001, Niek Bergboer wrote:
> Hmm, strange. unmount command should work on the dead share. It
> might take a while because some timeouts have to occur.
>
> > How difficult (and desirable) would it be to implement either one of
> > the following two options in smbfs:
> >
> > 1. The ability to reconnect to a server: suppose a server switches
> > off, and switches on again the following day.
>
> This is already done - a reconnect procedure happens after share
> detected as dead.
>
> > 2. The ability to forcefully unmount the share on my local machine, to
> > such an extent that if the server cannot be contacten within a
> > specified amount of time, that the entry is bluntly deleted from the
> > kernel's internal list of mounted filesystems (or something along
> > those lines).
>
> As I said it should work, but there is always room for bugs :)
> --
> Boris Popov
--
Conscience doth make cowards of us all.
-- Shakespeare
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010605141525.D66239>