1. 06 11月, 2007 1 次提交
  2. 13 10月, 2007 1 次提交
  3. 31 8月, 2007 1 次提交
  4. 19 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  5. 13 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  6. 08 7月, 2007 2 次提交
  7. 07 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  8. 09 5月, 2007 1 次提交
  9. 01 5月, 2007 1 次提交
    • S
      [CIFS] UID/GID override on CIFS mounts to Samba · 4523cc30
      Steve French 提交于
      When CIFS Unix Extensions are negotiated we get the Unix uid and gid
      owners of the file from the server (on the Unix Query Path Info
      levels), but if the server's uids don't match the client uid's users
      were having to disable the Unix Extensions (which turned off features
      they still wanted).   The changeset patch allows users to override uid
      and/or gid for file/directory owner with a default uid and/or gid
      specified at mount (as is often done when mounting from Linux cifs
      client to Windows server).  This changeset also displays the uid
      and gid used by default in /proc/mounts (if applicable).
      
      Also cleans up code by adding some of the missing spaces after
      "if" keywords per-kernel style guidelines (as suggested by Randy Dunlap
      when he reviewed the patch).
      Signed-off-by: NSteve French <sfrench@us.ibm.com>
      4523cc30
  10. 25 4月, 2007 1 次提交
  11. 03 4月, 2007 1 次提交
  12. 10 3月, 2007 1 次提交
  13. 27 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  14. 17 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  15. 09 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  16. 07 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  17. 09 12月, 2006 1 次提交
  18. 31 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  19. 12 10月, 2006 2 次提交
  20. 07 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  21. 02 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  22. 28 9月, 2006 1 次提交
  23. 27 9月, 2006 1 次提交
  24. 07 9月, 2006 1 次提交
  25. 15 8月, 2006 1 次提交
  26. 07 6月, 2006 1 次提交
  27. 02 6月, 2006 1 次提交
  28. 01 6月, 2006 2 次提交
  29. 23 4月, 2006 1 次提交
  30. 22 4月, 2006 2 次提交
  31. 27 3月, 2006 1 次提交
  32. 23 3月, 2006 1 次提交
  33. 28 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  34. 09 1月, 2006 1 次提交
    • S
      [CIFS] Fix cifs trying to write to f_ops · f3f6ec4b
      Steve French 提交于
      patch 2ea55c01e0c5dfead8699484b0bae2a375b1f61c fixed CIFS clobbering the
      global fops structure for some per mount setting, by duplicating and having
      2 fops structs. However the write to the fops was left behind, which is a
      NOP in practice (due to the fact that we KNOW the fops has that field set
      to NULL already due to the duplication). So remove it... In addition, another
      instance of the same bug was forgotten in november.
      Signed-off-by: NArjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
      Signed-off-by: NSteve French <sfrench@us.ibm.com>
      f3f6ec4b
  35. 19 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  36. 12 11月, 2005 1 次提交