From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suresh Jayaraman Subject: Re: Problems with CVS on CIFS since kernel 2.6.30 Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 20:23:17 +0530 Message-ID: <4C56DBDD.4070501@suse.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jon Bramley Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On 08/02/2010 07:28 PM, Jon Bramley wrote: > Hi all, > I'm experiencing a problem with the linux CIFS client which is > preventing me from using any kernel past 2.6.29, I've been=EF=BF=BDba= nging=EF=BF=BDmy > head against this one for some months now, so thought it about time t= o > ask some experts. I'm running Gentoo linux on a 32 bit machine. >=20 > When connecting to our cifs share on any kernel I've tried since > 2.6.29 (30, 31, 32, 33 and 34) I cannot use CVS on the share, as I ge= t > the following error: >=20 > 515 14:41 $ cvs update > cvs [update aborted]: cannot get working directory: No such file or d= irectory >=20 > Here is the bottom part of=EF=BF=BDan strace of the above command: > http://paste.org/pastebin/view/21095 >=20 > dmesg always seems to report the following, upon mount, on all kernel= s > past 2.6.29, which I'm guessing is related: >=20 > =EF=BF=BDCIFS VFS: server 10.194.0.106 of type Samba 3.0.28a returned > unexpected error on SMB posix open, disabling posix open support. > Check if server update available. > =EF=BF=BDCIFS VFS: Autodisabling the use of server inode numbers on > \\shared.orbis\shared. This server doesn't seem to support them > properly. Hardlinks will not be recognized on this mount. Consider > mounting with the "noserverino" option to silence this message. >=20 > I've tried mounting the share using the noserverino option, which See options serverino, noserverino and section inode numbers in 'man mount.cifs' for additional information regarding this error. Is there a hardlink involved? > indeed does get rid of the second of those lines in dmesg, but doesn'= t > fix the problem. Updating the server is not really an option (unless = I > can prove very good reason) since this is my work server. One slightl= y The samba version you are using seem to be quite old.. Does better POSI= X support/conformance sound like a good enough reason..? > strange thing, is that some of my colleagues run Ubuntu 10.04, which > uses the 2.6.32 kernel, and they can use the share without problem. What is the server version in this case? Thanks, --=20 Suresh Jayaraman