Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Nov 2007 13:53 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris "File-sharing between Windows and Sun's OpenSolaris Unix platform is being bolstered through two projects at Sun. The OpenSolaris project: CIFS Server features server software source code that implements the CIFS protocol also known as Server Message Block, the standard for Windows file-sharing services, Sun said. The internal CIFS server enables Microsoft users to store and retrieve files on an OpenSolaris system, Sun said. This project and a related effort, CIFS client, improve the usefulness of OpenSolaris in data environments that serve NFS and CIFS clients, Sun said. Sun recently donated server source code that implements CIFS to the OpenSolaris Project."
Thread beginning with comment 285998
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: X
by segedunum on Thu 22nd Nov 2007 11:20 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: X"
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't matter what I've heard of, the fact is Jeremy has nothing to do with what Sun is actually doing.

Hang on sweetheart. You're telling me Sun is doing this because they want to integrate code into their own kernel, as well as the usual, well worked licensing arguments, and I've pointed out that those are simply bogus. That's all.

The integrated CIFS implementation is what Sun is doing, they like cramming shit into their kernel, that's their call. You don't get a say in the matter.

I don't care. However, I do get to point out that Sun are stupid and wrong, and I don't see anything around here that convinces me otherwise. There is no possible reason for not reusing Samba, but whatever, it's their funeral.

Reply Parent Score: -2

RE[6]: X
by Janizary on Thu 22nd Nov 2007 12:09 in reply to "RE[5]: X"
Janizary Member since:
2006-03-12

You're ignoring the previously made statements, there are reasons to ignore the previous implementation, but only one need be said. Samba's code is not usable. It doesn't get any clearer. The code Samba has cannot be used for what Sun wants, so Sun isn't using it. Must I add, "doy," in this post to attempt a strong suggestion that this should be obvious?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: X
by segedunum on Thu 22nd Nov 2007 16:41 in reply to "RE[6]: X"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

You're ignoring the previously made statements, there are reasons to ignore the previous implementation, but only one need be said. Samba's code is not usable.

Why? You're not answering the counter arguments. Saying it doesn't justify it in any way - it doesn't get clearer than that.

1. There are no licensing concerns at all with respect to the kernel. This is why kernel/user space separation works, and Samba/Linux have done it. Most existing Solaris customers use Samba, with or without Sun's help, and have done for years. SMB and CIFS on non-Windows platforms is nothing new.

2. The kernel arguments don't stand up. Linux has managed to come up with many kernel extensions that Samba uses very successfully today. Sun have never managed to do that, even after all these years.

3. Putting CIFS, and not only that, but the entire stack of interoperability stuff such as NTLM, Kerberos and Active Directory support into your kernel is pretty unwise. Sun will simply be dragged into doing this, because one thing leads on to another - and Samba is already doing it. It's an awful and sometimes dangerous protocol stack, and the only reason we have anything to do with it is because of Windows interoperability. There's an awful lot more to it than CIFS. In fact, adding this lot to a kernel is downright insane.

The code Samba has cannot be used for what Sun wants

Why? Folding your arms and sulking and saying "Sun's doing this regardless" does not justify saying that Samba cannot be used.

Must I add, "doy," in this post to attempt a strong suggestion that this should be obvious?

Because it isn't obvious, and saying that it is doesn't make it true without some justification.

I mean, I have absolutely no problem at all with Sun going off, doing their own thing and making their own choices and implementation. None whatsoever. That's their choice.

However, let's not pretend for a second that there are any real, legitimate reasons whatsoever for doing this. It's just a pointless waste of effort to come up with yet another implementation of, not a standard, but a reverse engineered proprietary set of protocols that sets the open source world back in terms of interoperability.

Sun are doing this because it's all about control. That's why.

Reply Parent Score: 4