NTFS vs. Samba

Pierre A. Humblet Pierre.Humblet@ieee.org
Mon Aug 30 23:30:00 GMT 2004

At 11:35 AM 8/30/2004 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>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).

No objection at all. We can even remove the fs_has_ea guessing game.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list