From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: -o noposixpaths Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:06:26 -0400 Message-ID: <20110711150626.64dad9bd@tlielax.poochiereds.net> References: <20110711142311.27b4dfce@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20110711144146.3748d1ff@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Steve French Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:48:20 -0500 Steve French wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:32:54 -0500 > > Steve French wrote: > > > >> Yes, IIRC the apple guys mentioned plausible server scenarios for this > >> (where we want to mount with unix extensions for symlinks and ownership > >> but server can not handle posix path names) > >> > >> Presumably if the server file system does not support posix path names > >> (FAT32, NTFS?) or if we want to restrict the characters (for interoperability > >> with Windows clients accessing the same share?) - might be other cases. > >> > > > > In that case though, shouldn't those servers just not set > > CIFS_UNIX_POSIX_PATHNAMES_CAP ? > > I don't think servers do that (unset the POSIX_PATHNAMES CAP for one > share and not others, even assuming the share exports all volumes > of the same file system type) for the former case > (unless they cant support posix path at all for the whole server), > and for the latter case, not sure that the server can know enough > information (about other clients which may mount the system) > to unset the CAP unilaterally. > This explanation doesn't make any sense. IIUC, The server should only set the flag if it's appropriate to use posix-style pathnames on the share. Why should the server care at all what the clients can support? Perhaps I should phrase this question differently: Under what circumstances would someone want to use the "noposixpaths" mount option? -- Jeff Layton