: I'll take a look at this ... I haven't heard of any timestamp problems
: with older Samba servers, but maybe something has changed.
:
: > I must say that I have just mounted a Windows 95 share and the dates
: > are also incorrect (year 1969).
:
: What mount flags did you use for the Win 95 share? You need to tell
: smbfs that it's a Win 95 server to work around the bugs. Please check
: the smbfs.txt file in Documentation.
OK, I have some more information, here's what I did:
I compiled a fresh 2.1.x kernel with smbfs support as a module (to be
able to debug more easyly). Then I mounted a share from a Samba server
one time with -f 1755 and the other with just -f 755. Guess what?
Well, with -f 1755 I get "SMBFS: Win 95 bug fixes enabled" as expected
and when I do a "ls -l" of the directory contents I see all the dates
screwed up. When mounting with -f 755 I don't get the kernel message
and the dates are OK.
Oh, I forgot to mention that I compiled the kernel without enabling
CONFIG_SMB_WIN95. Last time when I had the problems with the dates I
had this compiled in.
So my question now is: is it normal to have this kind of behavior of
having incorrect dates when enabling the Windows 95 fixes for
non-Windows 95 servers?
Thanks,
E.-
--Eloy A. Paris Information Technology Department Rockwell Automation de Venezuela Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9431645