Hi, Using Samba 3.0.1 on SuSE Linux (follow symlinks on) we noticed the following behaviour: A symbolic link to a file gets overwritten (replaced) by the target-file contents if the symbolic link is saved from a windows client. This is not what we expected, because a link represents the file, and so all actions executed on the link should actually be executed on the target-file, not the link. I found one and only one message in the mailing archives about this topic (5 Feb 02:45, Francis Vierboom, "samba and writing through hard/symbolic links") and the answer was "what samba did was to follow very precisely the instructions given by your MS Windows software", which is the wrong point of view, I think, because then samba should also deliver the symbolic link file, not the file the link points to, right? Is there any setting / patch / anything we can do to make samba use symbolic links correctly? Thanks a lot, Martin Schuster ______________________________________________________________________________ Nachrichten, Musik und Spiele schnell und einfach per Quickstart im WEB.DE Screensaver - Gratis downloaden: http://screensaver.web.de/?mc=021110
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10 Jan 2004 at 18:49, Martin Schuster wrote:> hard/symbolic links") and the answer was "what samba did was to > follow very precisely the instructions given by your MS Windows > software", which is the wrong point of view, I think, because then > samba should also deliver the symbolic link file, not the file the > link points to, right?It actually worked correctly in that case. Most Windows applications I've dealt with don't overwite existing files when saving. They create a new file, fill it with the information, delete the old file, and rename new_name to old_name. When Windows asks for the file, Samba does the right thing by sending the link's target. When Windows wants the file deleted, Samba deletes the link instead of the target because that's the way links are treated in *nix. It has no way of knowing that Windows is really doing a save operation. I imagine the only way to deal with this would be making Samba cache the file operations without doing anything destructive. After X time, review the cache for hints that a save was being done and then perform the operation "properly". That would probably require a major rewrite and put a heavy load on the system. Of course I could be wrong, I'm certainly not a Samba guru. :) - -- Through the modem, off the server, over the T1, past the frame-relay, < < NOTHIN' BUT NET > > Daniel Johnson Progman2000@usa.net http://dannyj.come.to/ Public PGP Keys & other info: http://dannyj.come.to/pgp/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32) - GPGshell v2.95 iD8DBQFAAMig6vGcUBY+ge8RArOjAKDbO50Er+oUz3b9NYtjulArUTgTFwCfUR+x ECOcFcajpBiVLstVgmfKmWc=CTfG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Martin Schuster wrote:> Is there any setting / patch / anything we can do to make samba use> symbolic links correctly? It's probably the windows application removing the original file and creating a new one. Check level 10 samba logs to verify this behavior. Look for SMBmv. cheers, jerry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hewlett-Packard ------------------------- http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team ---------------------- http://www.samba.org GnuPG Key ---- http://www.plainjoe.org/gpg_public.asc "If we're adding to the noise, turn off this song" --Switchfoot (2003) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAAtMJIR7qMdg1EfYRAootAJ9IgMyNrzFEr5STW3lLBYPCPomZPwCgzyjR xE0PKb6kOazSbs/dVU1i63Q=YePD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----