public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN <eric2.valette@francetelecom.com>
To: sfrench@us.ibm.com, torvalds@osdl.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: CIFS improvements/wider testing needed
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:02:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4381C56F.106@francetelecom.com> (raw)

As probably many others, I work in an environment where Windows servers
 (and thus CIFS filesystem) is used to store home data and backuped
shared data. With OpenOffice 2.0 now out, reading and writing Microsoft
Office documents is generally not anymore a problem except due to
current CIFS bugs.

I tried to do my part of bug hunting, carefully reporting bugs and
offering help to try to fix them (although I cannot do too hazardous
testing on my professional Laptop. See bugzilla reference below).
Unfortunately, things did not improve over the past 5 months and even
recently slightly got worse (see second bug).

Trying to push Linux in corporate environments in such condition is very
difficult because, due to those bugs, you cannot:

	1) save a new openoffice document twice,
	2) create mail folders from inside thunderbird (local mailbox shared
with windows),
	3) avoid to do FSCK after each reboot,

I've seen many changes going in CIFS git tree during this period but
only few bugs got really hunted and fixed (try to set the close option
in bugzilla at
<https://bugzilla.samba.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance+desc&bug_status=__open__&product=CifsVFS&content=>).
SMBfs do not exibit some of the bugs CIFS has but has other limitations
as well.

Could other on the LKML list try to reproduce/confirm the following bugs
with the latest snapshot:

NB : the second bug appeared with CIFS 1.39 and is not present in 2.6.14.2

BUGS :
	<https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2673>
	<https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3237>


May I suggest to fix bugs as a priority before adding new features for a
while? Or at least make sure enough testing is done to avoid regressions?



-- eric

             reply	other threads:[~2005-11-21 13:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-21 13:02 VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-21 16:04 CIFS improvements/wider testing needed Steve French
2005-11-21 17:26 ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
2005-11-21 21:28   ` Steve French
2005-11-22  9:19     ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
     [not found]       ` <43834052.4090509@austin.rr.com>
2005-11-22 16:47         ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
2005-11-21 21:31   ` Steve French
2005-11-22 10:36     ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
2005-11-22 13:57     ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
     [not found]       ` <43834994.10006@austin.rr.com>
2005-11-22 17:24         ` VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN
2005-11-22 16:40 Steve French

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4381C56F.106@francetelecom.com \
    --to=eric2.valette@francetelecom.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sfrench@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox