> Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > I'd appreciate feedback on these - especially on the Alpha platform so I can fix any further
> > problems they may have caused someone and submit this on to Linus for 2.0.34
>
> Are there any planned fixes for smbfs? I understand that some of the
> problems we see
> are fixed in 2.1 but we do need this is the stable 2.0.
Indeed. I just noticed that my 2.0.32 system is screwing up
timestamps on files on an NT server. I had never noticed this
before on 2.0.29 or 2.0.30. Is it possible that something has
changed with smbfs since 2.0.29, or did I just never notice
the problem before?
Bill Hawes suggested going to 2.1.79 as a solution (which
I don't mind doing) but I will probably run into resistance
from management and that is always frustrating.
Regards,
Eric Hoeltzel