[Bug 224790] New: broken mount of OS/2 shares
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 Summary: broken mount of OS/2 shares Product: openSUSE 10.2 Version: RC 3 Platform: Other OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Critical Priority: P5 - None Component: Kernel AssignedTo: kernel-maintainers@forge.provo.novell.com ReportedBy: mrmazda@ij.net QAContact: qa@suse.de smbfs has been removed from kernel-default-2.6.18.2-33. Supposedly smbfs vfs has been replaced by cifs, but cifs is unusable with OS/2 shares. So, mounting with smbfs fails in 10.2, and mounting with cifs in 10.2 is nearly equally useless. I can't tell if https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4090 is relevant here, but it does speak to cifs failure issues. https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3815 should be relevant, and it isn't fixed. cifs is unlikely to be fixed any time soon, so smbfs needs to be restored to the kernel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #1 from mrmazda@ij.net 2006-12-01 17:55 MST ------- With the kind assistance of a fellow Linux and OS/2 user, I just compiled 2.6.18.2-33-default with smbfs enabled, and it works just the same as 2.6.13-15.11-default does on 10.0. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #3 from mrmazda@ij.net 2006-12-15 16:19 MST ------- The kernel.org default 2.6.19 also works with smbfs enabled. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #4 from jeffm@novell.com 2006-12-16 09:27 MST ------- Created an attachment (id=110000) --> (https://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=110000&action=view) SRPM containing source for smbfs module Hi Felix - The smbfs module is obsolete and is known to be buggy. In general, it's been replaced by the cifs module, but as you've noticed, the cifs module doesn't support some older operating systems such as OS/2 and Win95. Here is a KMP SRPM that you can build to get the smbfs module for your system. You'll need the kernel-source package installed, and you can build it with: rpmbuild --rebuild smbfs-2.6.18-0.src.rpm This module is provided for your convenience and will never be re-included into the official distribution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #5 from mrmazda@ij.net 2006-12-16 10:16 MST ------- Jeff, What does KMP mean? How is this procedure impacted at kernel update times? Does it have to be done again? If so, is a new SRPM required? I found out recently that the 2.6.19 kernel has the timestamp problems with cifs fixed, but there remain cifs problems with EAs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 jeffm@novell.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Comment #6 from jeffm@novell.com 2006-12-16 11:22 MST ------- KMP means "kernel module package." It's the SUSE way of providing kernel modules with correct dependencies outside of the normal kernel-<flavor> method. If the dependencies are properly preserved, and they should be since we make every effort to preserve them between releases, you shouldn't need to rebuild the SRPM. If by chance the dependencies do change, you'll just need to do the rpmbuild again. You won't need an new SRPM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #7 from gassauer@kde.org 2007-01-22 01:46 MST ------- thanks for providing the file bug-224790_smbfs-2.6.18-0.src.rpm rpmbuild --rebuild bug-224790_smbfs-2.6.18-0.src.rpm does the job and works fine. Jeff, I just have problems to accept your explanation in #4. What happens in praxis is, that the buggy smbfs module (which BTW worked fine for many years) was replaced by the cifs module without an equivalent feature (codepage=cp850) making some installations obsolete WITHOUT (!) notice. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 jeffm@novell.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Comment #8 from jeffm@novell.com 2007-02-02 12:43 MST ------- Sorry, but the problem with smbfs is that it is no longer actively maintained. Since the CIFS module obsoleted it, with the exception of handling really old exports, we weren't looking to commit resources to continue maintaining it. I don't have more information on why it being obsoleted wasn't communicated in the release notes, but it should have been. Mea culpa. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 mrmazda@ij.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX | ------- Comment #9 from mrmazda@ij.net 2007-02-02 17:35 MST ------- This can be fixed by fixing the broken CIFS. Are you saying there is no intent to fix CIFS? W9X has similar trouble. Mounts ostensibly work, but the timestamps are screwed up when CIFS is used to copy or move files. This bug isn't per se about smbfs. It's about unbreaking network connectivity with legacy operating systems that was not broken in previous versions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 lmb@novell.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|kernel- |lmuelle@novell.com |maintainers@forge.provo.nove| |ll.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #11 from biteme@bitbasher.net 2007-02-17 14:59 MST ------- I applied the KMP, but it still didn't work. It appears there's been a new security patch to the samba-client package that REMOVES smbmount completely. This patch was applied on Feb 14th. I noticed now that I don't have smbmount nor mount.smbfs anywhere in my filesystem. After fiddling with Yast (noob here) I was able to rollback the samba-client package to 3.0.23d-6 from the patched version 3.0.23d-19.2 and I can get smbfs to work again. I'm no Yast guru, but I can't seem to get Yast to "forget about that patch" nor can I get the samba-client package to be "sticky" with the PROTECTED symbol. When I accept the changes, the protected symbols goes away. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #12 from jrobiso2@ford.com 2007-02-20 13:15 MST ------- I am going to try and cp the smbmount program over to /usr/local/bin. The patch applied on Feb 14th was very poorly thought out, IMHO, considering how many people have complained about how badly cifs is at replacing it. Considering that for me, both Konqueror and Nautilus crash/lock when attempting to access a cifs mounted directory, I'm going to stick with smbfs for the forseeable future. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 ------- Comment #13 from biteme@bitbasher.net 2007-02-23 15:15 MST ------- I noticed that the .spec file for this rpm states: Summary: Kernel module for ACPI device activation on some Acer Notebooks I've installed this smbfs bugfix, and it's working fine. I just assume that the summary description is a copy/paste typo - I don't think I install an Acer thingamajig. :P Also, for clarification, am I assuming correctly that I can run the rebuild step against a newer kernel (say kernel-source-2.6.18.5-36.1.src.rpm) and the resulting KMP rpm will install cleanly with the newer kernel build? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User jeffm@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c15 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sfrench@us.ibm.com, jeffm@novell.com Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Info Provider| |mrmazda@ij.net --- Comment #15 from Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@novell.com> 2008-01-11 11:04:04 MST --- Does the OS/2 incompatibility still exist with 10.3? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User mrmazda@ij.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c16 Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW Info Provider|mrmazda@ij.net | --- Comment #16 from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> 2008-01-11 17:20:27 MST --- CIFS even from git today would be unusable with OS/2. Until the CIFS EA bug(s) are fixed, interoperability with OS/2 requires SMBFS and smbmount, which means user recompiling multiple packages. That done, the legacy OS/2 LANMAN shares can be successfully mounted and used in 10.3. Steve French and Guenter Kukkukk should know much better than I what the status of getting the EAs problems fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User lmuelle@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c17 Lars Müller <lmuelle@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sjayaraman@novell.com --- Comment #17 from Lars Müller <lmuelle@novell.com> 2008-01-14 04:39:35 MST --- Adding Suresh to keep him in the loop too. As there are several people very active regarding CIFS kernel development I suggest to discuss the support for OS/2 upstream. This even shows the requirement of OS/2 support to the Linux CIFS community. linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org is the list in question. As smbfs isn't longer developed I fear it might get removed from the kernel upstream as well. The drop of smbfs from the SUSE kernels was driven by our experience from the past. Instead of using CIFS SUSE customers again and again ran in trouble by using smbfs. By removing smbfs this had been decreased a lot. The opposite, complains regarding the removal had been the minority. Nevertheless the report shows there is still a requirement for smbfs. Even if minimal. But instead of adding smbfs to the SUSE kernel again I suggest to combine the different forces to close this gap. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|kernel-maintainers@forge.provo.novell.com |lmb@novell.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|lmb@novell.com |sjayaraman@novell.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User mrmazda@ij.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c19 --- Comment #19 from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> 2008-03-27 13:11:38 MST --- In Factory updated within past 48 hours, I can see and navigate directories with MC, and see files, but attempting to open (view content of) various plain text files produces the following: CIFS VFS: Send error in QFSAttributeInfo = -95 :-( When I posted a comment to that effect, along with the cifs mount options I used, on irc://freenode/samba-os2, I got this response: messages like "Send error in QFSAttributeInfo = -95" are minor glitches in cifs - this function should not have been called for legacy servers - but most of the time, cifs is then calling alternate legacy functions. also for performance reasons, cifs should check the server type _before_ calling a function. Atm it's calling a function (for more recent smb dialects) - if that fails, it's calling somewhat older alternate functions. Not the real nice way ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User sjayaraman@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c20 Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|Critical |Normal --- Comment #20 from Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> 2008-07-18 03:19:56 MDT --- Have initiated a discussion with upstream folks on OS/2 support. Will keep the bugzilla updated. Meanwhile, noticed the Severity is not appropriate. Changing Severity -> Normal (Prevents important or desirable feature from working properly) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User mrmazda@ij.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c21 --- Comment #21 from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> 2008-07-18 06:57:01 MDT --- It seems to be getting close. The last remaining upstream dep I'm aware of is https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5599 Since writing to LANMAN shares is still broken, CIFS remains useless for anyone needing write reliability. Thus, current severity of merely NORMAL is inappropriate, grossly understating severity. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User sjayaraman@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c22 Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO Info Provider| |mrmazda@ij.net --- Comment #22 from Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> 2008-07-20 23:35:53 MDT --- What does your SecurityFlags setting say? $cat /proc/fs/cifs/SecurityFlags Can you try setting it as "0x10010" and try? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User mrmazda@ij.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c23 --- Comment #23 from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> 2008-07-21 00:50:07 MDT --- Try what? Maybe you want the reporter of https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5599 to try? I don't have (and won't permit as long as DIR timestamps are allowed to be changed from create to last write by cifs mounted subdir file writes) any writable OS/2 shares on any production OS/2 box. That means I would have to specially configure an extra system or shared partition just to test something I have no familiarity with (writable share behavior) that would require extra hand holding. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User sjayaraman@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c24 --- Comment #24 from Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> 2008-07-21 01:07:41 MDT --- I just wanted to be sure whether the LANMAN security is enabled or not since I don't see any mention about it in the bug report. By default it is disabled. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User mrmazda@ij.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c25 Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED Info Provider|mrmazda@ij.net | --- Comment #25 from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> 2008-07-21 01:57:58 MDT --- ATM I have used: mount -t cifs //servern/share /mountpoint --verbose -o credentials=/etc/samba/servern.cred,sec=lanman,servern=SERVERN,domain=DOMAIN,port=139,dir_mode=0555,file_mode=0444 /proc/fs/cifs/SecurityFlags shows 0x7 and mount shows //servern/share /mountpoint type cifs (rw,mand) I have no idea the reason for mount showing rw on a share that does not permits writes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790 User sjayaraman@novell.com added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224790#c28 Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #28 from Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@novell.com> 2008-07-22 01:23:48 MDT --- There's not a lot of development happening in the CIFS community w.r.t OS/2 shares support. It has to be fixed upstream first. Sorry, we are not considering supporting legacy OS/2 shares as a high priority item at the moment and we won't be able to work towards fixing it. However, we'll surely track the upstream developments and will include relevant missing pieces once it is made available upstream. You can continue to use smbfs KMP as suggested by Jeff in Comment #4. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com