Re: [9fans] cifs fails on nodes named aux

[Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net>]

Quoting dexen deVries <dexen.devries@gmail.com>:

> On Wednesday 28 of August 2013 10:26:01 Erik Quanstrom wrote:
>> the claim that the devices are in the directories and thus the file system
>> is still false.  even if explorer has some unnecessary code.  and plan 9 is
>> not immune from unnecessary weird bits e.g. the export protocol.
>
>
>
> a somewhat official specification confirms that -- by not listing those magic
> files as implied:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463084
>


not sure why FAT32 would be relevant here, since he's using a linux
cifs server from an ext fs.  samba mangles reserved names much as it
mangles long filenames -- check mangle_hash2.c for examples.  when
samba is deciding if a filename needs to be mangled, it checks for
reserved words along with filename length and prohibited characters.
so if samba decides it nees to serve a file named aux, it's going to
ruin it, unless you specifically disable this behavior.  for the
record, windows itself does this nonsense as well, unless you've got
the 'cifs extensions for unix' garbage slathered on.  the curse of bad
design lives on.

I'm not sufficiently intimate with the cifs server he's using, or plan
9's cifs client, to explain why the behavior is different using the
linux client.  There's generally a lot of magic involved with cifs
deciding how best to vomit its guts across the wire, and I've
deliberately avoided learning it where possible.  Were this my system,
I'd just switch to 9p.

khm