mount_smbfs in base?

Quark 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
> Cc: 
> 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
> /usr/sbin/mount_smbfs
> $ which smbutil
> /usr/bin/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?

> 
>     matthias
> -- 
> 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 
> E-mail
> phone: +49-170-4527211       |  - Respect for open standards
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list