Re: rump vs. smbfs

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:44:15PM -0500, James K. Lowden wrote:
> Andrew Reilly wrote:
> > I've been using
> > smbclient as part of a backup script for years.  Works fine and
> > reliably, if you're just putting a dump or tar file on a remote
> > server.  
> 
> I'm surprised to hear that.  The last time I looked at the smbclient
> sources was some years ago.  At the time there was *no* error checking. 
> It was strictly a toy; a copy could fail and the exit code would indicate
> success.  Has that changed?  

No, it still doesn't seem to set the return code properly. But it seems
to transfer data properly.

I've tried "mount_smbfs" which worked fine. But I got "invalid argument"
when I tried to "ls -l" on the mount SMB share which seems to be an
old problem, please look here:

http://mail-index.netbsd.org/current-users/2004/03/12/0005.html

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/