Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:03:42 +0900
From:      "SANETO Takanori" <sanewo@ba2.so-net.ne.jp>
To:        <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: SMBFS problems in this morning's -CURRENT
Message-ID:  <002401c453fe$940412b0$1400a8c0@Venus>
References:  <200404191110.20057.jonathan@fosburgh.org><20040419181423.H650@korben> <4083FD45.6050604@FreeBSD.org><200404191136.53506.syjef@mdanderson.org> <20040419164656.GA56629@chihiro.leafy.idv.tw>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Before calling mount(2), mount_smbfs calls smb_lib_init(), which requires
smbfs module loaded.

Solution 1: It's a spec. Put ``smbfs_load="YES"'' in your loader.conf.
Solution 2: Modify(backout) mount_smbfs so that it behaves as before.
Solution 3: Modify smb_lib_init so that it tries to load smbfs if it failed.

Ideas?
--
SANETO Takanori

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "leafy" <leafy@leafy.idv.tw>
To: "Jonathan Fosburgh" <syjef@mdanderson.org>
Cc: <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; "Lukas Ertl" <le@FreeBSD.org>; "Alex
Dupre" <ale@FreeBSD.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: SMBFS problems in this morning's -CURRENT


> On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 11:36:35AM -0500, Jonathan Fosburgh wrote:
> > I had to do the same thing this time, but I assumed (perhaps
incorrectly) that
> > it had something to do with trying to use the previous, incorrect
version of
> > mount_smbfs.
> >
> > - -- 
> > Jonathan Fosburgh
> The new binary requires this, the old one did not. The commit message
> says that mount(2) will auto-load the smbfs kernel module, but I am
> afraid it's not the case.
>
> Jiawei
> -- 
> "Without the userland, the kernel is useless."
>                --inspired by The Tao of Programming




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002401c453fe$940412b0$1400a8c0>