On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 12:37, John Davis wrote:
> Hey all -
> SMB shares are fun and useful, but our present livecds are unable to
> mount them. We do in fact have smbfs support in the kernel, but like
> nfs, smb needs its userland tool samba to complete the mount (iirc). So,
> are there any major objections to adding samba onto our livecds? 

Samba is not required to mount a SMB share, it just makes it easier and
allows for more ability.  I would venture to bet that the actual
stumbling block is BusyBox's mount not being as full-featured as the
real thing.

Also, you can mount NFS without nfs-utils... it is just SLOW as hell in
mounting, but it *will* mount.

Personally, I think having the full-blown samba on the LiveCD will add
*way* too much, unless we went and livecd/empty and livecd/rm'd
everything that wasn't absolutely necessary for mounting.  This does
take us down a slippery slope, as we'll soon enough have users
requesting us to keep the full package.

I think it requires more investigation into why, exactly, mounting a SMB
share does not work with the current LiveCD's.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?