Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:54:42 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Harti Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org>, Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com>, current@freebsd.org, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Antony Mawer <fbsd-current@mawer.org>
Subject:   Re: Moving from smbfs to cifs
Message-ID:  <20080611174933.C66190@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de>
In-Reply-To: <20080611163433.H40102@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <7d6fde3d0806091102k62637099qbaa73ca4d38ff64c@mail.gmail.com> <e7db6d980806091319n1caef691k2b0dbf295d796311@mail.gmail.com> <484DB796.4030204@mawer.org> <20080611022502.3d6c01d5.stas@FreeBSD.org> <484F5726.9050300@mawer.org> <484F6999.4080001@mawer.org> <20080611163433.H40102@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008, Robert Watson wrote:

RW>
RW>On Wed, 11 Jun 2008, Antony Mawer wrote:
RW>
RW>> > I stumbled across patches available by R. Imura which are a work todays
RW>> > adding Unicode support to smbfs, and from what I gather are derived from
RW>> > changes in Darwin (Mac OS X) smbfs:
RW>> > 
RW>> > http://people.freebsd.org/~imura/kiconv/
RW>> > 
RW>> > 
RW>> > There are potentially other improvements available from the Darwin SMBFS
RW>> > implementation, available here:
RW>> > 
RW>> > http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.5.2/
RW>> > http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/other/smb-348.1.tar.gz
RW>> 
RW>> Probably another reference worth looking at:
RW>> 
RW>> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/smbfs/
RW>
RW>Oh, interesting -- I didn't realize that OpenSolaris had picked up our smbfs
RW>implementation also.  I spent some time about six months ago comparing the
RW>FreeBSD and FreeBSD-derived Mac OS X implementations of smbfs, and the
RW>differences were almost all syntactic.  In particular, their mbuf interfaces
RW>have all been renamed as part of the KPI work; they have also added some
RW>crypto/kerberos parts that we don't have.  It would be interesting to do a
RW>similar comparison of with the OpenSolaris version.

The Kerberos support would be a big win... I remember that I had a look at 
the code, but I have not clue with Kerberos programming so I gave up very 
fast :-(

harti



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080611174933.C66190>