On Apr 30 2007 17:52, Steve French wrote:
>
> Now that we (Samba team) understand enough about it to implement
> prototypes (there is a prototype server in Samba 4, and a userspace
> client library for testing), we need to decide whether the kernel
> implementation of SMB2 client should be a distinct module or just part
> of the cifs.ko module.
Do it like CONFIG_FAT_FS/CONFIG_MSDOS_FS/CONFIG_VFAT_FS...
config SMB_COMMON
tristate
config CIFS
select SMB_COMMON
config SMB2
select SMB_COMMON
> SMB2 (the protocol) is smaller than cifs,
Could not they have named it CIFS2... :p
And, what also puzzles me... almost every filesystem that's not at revision 1
anymore (ext2/3/4, reiser4, smb2) does not have the usually omnipresent "fs"
suffix anymore (cf. reiserfs, smbfs). Maybe it's time to drop all the "fs"
suffixes? :)
Jan
--