samba - Apr 2002 - smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt

Hi,
 I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that the
system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe "smbmount,
smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not very
clear about smbmnt though!
 I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around 300
to 400Kb each.
 I understand that Samba is capable of doing complex things. However if all
i need is the ability to mount and unmount share points do i need this big a
smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt?
 Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i am
forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without it? Also
the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my embedded
development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above files
were not found, it works fine! What does this mean? What are its
implications? Can i do without these too?

 My target is MIPS running on Linux. I could not compile Samba for MIPS
directly. However after some jugglery i changed my Makefile and it compiled
me smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt. Now smb works on my target system too.
However the file size is huge [801, 815 and 797 Kb]. How can i reduce this?

 Any help regarding the same would he great.

 Thanks a lot in advance.

Thanks and Regards,
Abdij

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Abdij Bhat wrote:
> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe
"smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not
very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around 300
> to 400Kb each.
>  I understand that Samba is capable of doing complex things. However if all
> i need is the ability to mount and unmount share points do i need this big
a
> smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt?
>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without it?
Also
> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above
files
> were not found, it works fine! What does this mean? What are its
> implications? Can i do without these too?
Welcome to my nightmare :-)
>  My target is MIPS running on Linux. I could not compile Samba for MIPS
> directly. However after some jugglery i changed my Makefile and it compiled
> me smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt. Now smb works on my target system too.
> However the file size is huge [801, 815 and 797 Kb]. How can i reduce this?
Samba is not well structured from the point of view of people only trying 
to build a small number of components like that, however, it may be that 
you do actually need much of that stuff.

I have just gone through the process of extracting part of smbtorture out 
to simply do the netbench stuff, and I have reduced the number of files 
built and linked from 122 to about 33.

However, I do not want to do that for Samba.

Regards
-----
Richard Sharpe, rsharpe@ns.aus.com, rsharpe@samba.org, 
sharpe@ethereal.com

> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement 
> is that the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I 
> believe "smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I 
> am not very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite 
> huge. Around 300
> to 400Kb each.
>  I understand that Samba is capable of doing complex things. 
> However if all
> i need is the ability to mount and unmount share points do i 
> need this big a
> smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt?
>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel 
> configuration, i am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do 
> without it? Also
> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in 
> my embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that 
> the above files
> were not found, it works fine! What does this mean? What are its
> implications? Can i do without these too?
> 
>  My target is MIPS running on Linux. I could not compile 
> Samba for MIPS
> directly. However after some jugglery i changed my Makefile 
> and it compiled
> me smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt. Now smb works on my target 
> system too.
> However the file size is huge [801, 815 and 797 Kb]. How can 
> i reduce this?
> 
>  Any help regarding the same would he great.
> 
>  Thanks a lot in advance.
I belive the Amiga version is under 100kb exe.
It also have wrapper to take care of POSIX calls.

Could be useful ?

--
Ulf

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Abdij Bhat wrote:
> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe
"smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not
very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around 300
> to 400Kb each.
smbmnt is linked with libsmb even though it doesn't use anything from it.
It is possible to make it much smaller by editing the makefile. I have a
patch if you want. smbmnt exists to allow parts of the code to be setuid
root for normal user mounts and is run by smbmount.

smbumount is only needed if you need normal users to mount and umount
things. root can umount with the normal umount command so you could just
remove it.

smbmount only uses a few parts of libsmb directly, but there are a lot of
dependencies between different parts of libsmb.

>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without it?
Also
If you don't enable any of the kernel codepage modules, nothing extra will
be built. If you don't enable CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT then smbfs will not
use any nls code.

> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above
files
Those are samba codepages and the smb.conf controls which ones to use,
with these being the defaults(?).

/Urban

Hi,
 Thanks Urban for all the info. It was really of use to me especially since
i could do without smbmnt and smbumount.

 Sorry for the delay in my response.

 Could you please send me the patch you have used to reduce the footprint of
smb clients. I beleive that will really be very helpful for me.

 Also regarding the codepages i have some more query.
1. Since some other components in our embedded system needs codepages, we
have enabled the code pages in the kernel.
2. We have however not enables the CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT. So smbfs should
not be using any codepages.
3. I have nothing in my smb.conf for the codepages. ( IS there any way to
disable codepage use in the smb.conf?)
4. However when i run my client i still get the errors i had previously
reported.

 WHat might the problem be?

 Once again thanks a lot for your time and advice.

Thanks and Regards,
Abdij

-----Original Message-----
From: Urban Widmark [mailto:urban@teststation.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 12:32 AM
To: Abdij Bhat
Cc: 'smb-clients@lists.samba.org';
'samba-technical@lists.samba.org';
'samba@lists.samba.org'
Subject: Re: smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt


On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Abdij Bhat wrote:
> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe
"smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not
very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around 300
> to 400Kb each.
smbmnt is linked with libsmb even though it doesn't use anything from it.
It is possible to make it much smaller by editing the makefile. I have a
patch if you want. smbmnt exists to allow parts of the code to be setuid
root for normal user mounts and is run by smbmount.

smbumount is only needed if you need normal users to mount and umount
things. root can umount with the normal umount command so you could just
remove it.

smbmount only uses a few parts of libsmb directly, but there are a lot of
dependencies between different parts of libsmb.

>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without it?
Also

If you don't enable any of the kernel codepage modules, nothing extra will
be built. If you don't enable CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT then smbfs will not
use any nls code.

> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above
files

Those are samba codepages and the smb.conf controls which ones to use,
with these being the defaults(?).

/Urban

Hi,
 Thanks Urban for all the info. It was really of use to me especially
since i could do without smbmnt and smbumount.

 Sorry for the delay in my response.

 Could you please send me the patch you have used to reduce the
footprint of smb clients. I beleive that will really be very helpful for
me.

 Also regarding the codepages i have some more query.
1. Since some other components in our embedded system needs codepages,
we have enabled the code pages in the kernel.
2. We have however not enables the CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT. So smbfs
should not be using any codepages.
3. I have nothing in my smb.conf for the codepages. ( IS there any way
to disable codepage use in the smb.conf?)
4. However when i run my client i still get the errors i had previously
reported.

 WHat might the problem be?

 Once again thanks a lot for your time and advice.

Thanks and Regards,
Abdij

-----Original Message-----
From: Urban Widmark [mailto:urban@teststation.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 12:32 AM
To: Abdij Bhat
Cc: 'smb-clients@lists.samba.org';
'samba-technical@lists.samba.org';
'samba@lists.samba.org'
Subject: Re: smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt


On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Abdij Bhat wrote:
> Hi,
>  I am deploying samba for an embedded system. The requirement is that
the
> system should be able to mount windows share points. I believe
"smbmount,
> smbumount and smbmnt" components are needed to do the same. I am not
very
> clear about smbmnt though!
>  I find that smbmount, smbumount and smbmnt are all quite huge. Around
300
> to 400Kb each.
smbmnt is linked with libsmb even though it doesn't use anything from
it.
It is possible to make it much smaller by editing the makefile. I have a
patch if you want. smbmnt exists to allow parts of the code to be setuid
root for normal user mounts and is run by smbmount.

smbumount is only needed if you need normal users to mount and umount
things. root can umount with the normal umount command so you could just
remove it.

smbmount only uses a few parts of libsmb directly, but there are a lot
of
dependencies between different parts of libsmb.

>  Also whenever i choose SMB_FS support in the Kernel configuration, i
am
> forced to choose the NLS. Do i really need it? How can i do without
it? Also

If you don't enable any of the kernel codepage modules, nothing extra
will
be built. If you don't enable CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT then smbfs will not
use any nls code.

> the smbmount demands codepage.850, codepage-def.850, unicode_map.850,
> unicode_map.ISO8859-1 files. I have not provided the same in my
embedded
> development environment. Funnily, although it complains that the above
files

Those are samba codepages and the smb.conf controls which ones to use,
with these being the defaults(?).

/Urban