Bug 6382 - case insensitive dfs links broken
Summary: case insensitive dfs links broken
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Samba 3.2
Classification: Unclassified
Component: File services (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other Linux
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Karolin Seeger
QA Contact: Samba QA Contact
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-05-20 10:45 UTC by Volker Lendecke
Modified: 2009-07-29 06:09 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments
patch (758 bytes, patch)
2009-05-20 10:48 UTC, Volker Lendecke 		no flags Details
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Volker Lendecke 2009-05-20 10:45:12 UTC 
/git/tmp > ls -l FOO/
insgesamt 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 vlendec users 23 20. Mai 16:15 link -> msdfs:192.168.234.100\tmp

smb: \> cd foo/link
cd \foo\link\: NT_STATUS_PATH_NOT_COVERED
smb: \> cd FOO/link
Connection to 192.168.234.100 failed (Error NT_STATUS_NETWORK_UNREACHABLE)
Unable to follow dfs referral [\192.168.234.100\tmp]
cd \FOO\link\: NT_STATUS_PATH_NOT_COVERED
smb: \> 

See that I have a directory FOO with a valid msdfs link inside. If I try to access that as foo/link it just gives NT_STATUS_PATH_NOT_COVERED. If I access it as FOO/link, it gets one step further. The NETWORK_UNREACHABLE is a different problem (I'm running this on socket wrapper right now). The bug I want to point out is the different behaviour of foo vs FOO.

This is a bug already fixed in master for a different reason: fe839b65a7b4 fixes upload of a special printer driver which relies on a case insensitive file system. The same fix applies to case insensitive DFS links: In both code paths we are using fake internal connection_struct's.

Volker
Comment 1 Volker Lendecke 2009-05-20 10:48:13 UTC 
Created attachment 4171 [details]
patch

This is essentially fe839b65a7b4 from master in 3.2
Comment 2 Jeremy Allison 2009-05-20 15:19:20 UTC 
+1 from me. This should be safe to add to 3.3 also IMHO.
Jeremy.
Comment 3 Volker Lendecke 2009-05-21 03:04:56 UTC 
Yep, this is 3.3 also. I just did not want to open two bugs :-)

Karolin, please tell me if the patch doesn't apply cleanly to 3.3.

Volker
Comment 4 Karolin Seeger 2009-05-23 13:25:23 UTC 
Pushed.
Will be included in 3.3.5 and 3.2.12.

Thanks!