smbmsg(8): slave address confusion?

Bruce M. Simpson bms at incunabulum.net
Sat Nov 22 17:20:07 PST 2008


Gavin Atkinson wrote:
> I believe this is the case, yes.  See for example, PR kern/100513.  It
> appears that some frivers treat the adfdress one way, and others treat
> it the other.
>   

I can confirm this from recent commercial work I had to do involving smb(4).

thanks,
BMS


More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list