> 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?
Please read smbfs.txt in Documentation/filesystems. It explicitly states
not to enable the Win 95 bug fixes if you're using other SMB servers on
your network.
Regards,
Bill