Bug 9904 - Timeout listing problem with smbclient
Summary: Timeout listing problem with smbclient
Alias: None
Product: Samba 3.6
Classification: Unclassified
Component: libsmbclient (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All All
: P5 major
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Samba Bugzilla Account
QA Contact: Samba QA Contact
Depends on:
Reported: 2013-05-27 06:21 UTC by Alternativend
Modified: 2013-09-11 17:29 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alternativend 2013-05-27 06:21:57 UTC
Hi there,
this is an addition to the following bug:

I have had contact to Scott Lovenberg and reported the bug to him. Unfortunately he rans out of time to fix it. 

The fix is quite easy, you just have to increase the following value in:


cli->timeout = 20000; /* Timeout is in milliseconds. */


cli->timeout = 2000000; /* Timeout is in milliseconds. */

or something like that.

I think a lot of people having trouble with this and it would be good to fix this in upstream. 

Comment 1 Alternativend 2013-06-17 06:52:31 UTC
Please can someone fix this once and for all?
It shouldn´t be so hard to do this right? 

I guess a lot of peopole who are backing up Windows clients with Samba could profit from it.

Comment 2 Volker Lendecke 2013-06-17 08:12:44 UTC
I am working on this right now, I have a patch for master almost finished. Sorry, but paying customers take precedence.
Comment 3 Alternativend 2013-08-14 05:56:47 UTC
Good to hear, Im waiting for this :).
Comment 4 Jeremy Allison 2013-09-10 22:18:46 UTC
In 4.1.0 there is a "timeout" parameter in smbclient that allows this to be controlled from the command line.

So this will be fixed in 4.1.0.

Comment 5 Alternativend 2013-09-11 14:33:11 UTC
Have you increased the default value as well? 
Otherwise Amanda, Bacula and so on would have to integrate that new parameter first and they would also have to check if Samba 4.1.0 is installed at lowest version. All other version would give out an error i think if you would give them parameters that don´t exist.
Comment 6 Jeremy Allison 2013-09-11 17:29:06 UTC
No, the default value hasn't changed. It works well under most cases so I'm loathe to mess with it.