mount_smbfs in base?
unixuser2000-fbsd at yahoo.com
Fri May 31 18:41:03 UTC 2013
----- Original Message -----
> From: Matthias Apitz <guru at unixarea.de>
> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Sent: Saturday, 1 June 2013 12:01 AM
> Subject: Re: mount_smbfs in base?
> El día Saturday, June 01, 2013 a las 02:09:58AM +0800, Quark escribió:
>> is mount_smbfs, smbutil and friends part of base system? this is FreeBSD
> amd64 9.1-RELEASE
> $ which mount_smbfs
> $ which smbutil
I saw that, but suspected I must have done something stupid that those binaries got placed there.
>> then what is extra in samba port?
> a SMB client and server
so this SMB client is recentish than what is in base?
I 'guess' samba was GPL, is it OK to let live GPL s/w in base when such strides are being attempted to oust GCC?
> Sent from my FreeBSD netbook
> Matthias Apitz | - No system with backdoors like Apple/Android
> E-mail: guru at unixarea.de | - Never being an iSlave
> WWW: http://www.unixarea.de/ | - No proprietary attachments, no HTML/RTF in
> phone: +49-170-4527211 | - Respect for open standards
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-questions