Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 06:31:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 06:31:18 -0500 Received: from mailout03.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.81]:21974 "EHLO mailout03.sul.t-online.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 06:31:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: 520047054719-0001@t-online.de (Oliver Neukum) Reply-To: Oliver.Neukum@lrz.uni-muenchen.de To: Christian =?iso-8859-1?q?Borntr=E4ger?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [question] implentation of smb-browsing: kernel space or user space? Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 12:30:28 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <16Rthx-1WF6ESC@fwd00.sul.t-online.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Therefore I had the idea, to implement this smb-browsing feature in kernel > space. It will be a kind of network neighbourhood-filesytem with all > computers as top level directories below the mount point. What could a kernel space browser do that a demon could not do ? > The first step might be to glue the autofs with smbfs and add a kernel smb > browser as a proof of concept. Do you say that autofs cannot be used to mount smbfs shares ? > My question is: Do you think, that this kind of filesystem is sensible, or > do you think that smb-stuff has to be in user space. (for example using the > filesystem in userspace approach, shown some weeks ago)? Smbfs itself must be in kernel. That doesn't imply that the browser has to be in kernel. Regards Oliver - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/