NTFS vs. Samba

Corinna Vinschen vinschen@redhat.com
Mon Aug 30 09:35:00 GMT 2004

On Aug 30 00:05, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 06:21:05PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Aug 29 11:49, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> >> One could have an smbntea that works on remote FAT (?) and real
> >> remote NTPS but not on samba... 
> >
> >Oh no, please.  Let's not expand ntea functionality.  What is that
> >fake good for?
> In that vein, should we eliminate ntea functionality entirely?  It
> creates huge files on FAT* partitions and is not required for non-FAT.
> Why do we need it?

Really, I don't know.  Personally I'd be in favor of removing it (together
with EA for symlinks on NTFS).


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list