Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 10:56:36 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Project information - SMBv2+ Message-ID: <41400a64-5f0b-295b-399e-711b9b40b6d3@grosbein.net> In-Reply-To: <8644f79e-3957-3498-efa9-8fbfc7b57581@quip.cz> References: <16e5725b-ec2f-3222-d20d-fd15e597c12c@gmx.net> <dea01842-79e7-33ed-4302-28f2df51d710@quip.cz> <075f31cb-dd13-778d-ed50-3ec7d6f30731@gmx.net> <704a700c-32ff-66eb-6711-5d75099abcd4@quip.cz> <20201230225624.atsnf6u5mmtcu5sw@nerd-thinkpad.local> <8644f79e-3957-3498-efa9-8fbfc7b57581@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
31.12.2020 6:33, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > Last time I tried smb with fuse it was unstable and does not allowed me > to configure what to mount where at boot time. > AFAIK fusefs-smbnetfs cannot be used the same way as mount_smbfs in fstab. > So I think smbnetfs is not usable solution in our environment even if it works stable and fast. What are you problems with fuse+fstab, exactly? Have you considered systax similar to the following example for net/glusterfs? gluster1:name /mnt/name fusefs rw,late,backup-volfile-servers=gluster2:gluster3,mountprog=/usr/local/sbin/mount_glusterfs 0 0
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41400a64-5f0b-295b-399e-711b9b40b6d3>