Shared publicly  - 
I got asked why the Kernel-Log in c't / on heise open and "The H" didn't mention that Linux kernel 3.6 offers SMB2 support for CIFS, which some news sites on the web report about.

Simple: That support is marked broken and afaics hence not usable in Linux 3.6 To clarify let me quote linux-3.6/fs/cifs/Kconfig

> config CIFS_SMB2
>        bool "SMB2 network file system support (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>        depends on EXPERIMENTAL && INET && BROKEN

Patches to change this were merged round about 36 hours ago for Linux 3.7; Quoting one ( ) of them:

> Now that the merge of the remaining pieces needed for SMB2 (SMB2.1
> dialect) are in, and most test cases pass, we can consider SMB2.1
> EXPERIMENTAL rather than "BROKEN."
Greg Kroah-Hartman's profile photoDiego Call.'s profile photoThorsten Leemhuis's profile photo
And BTW: Mistakes happen and I'm doing ones, too. Thus I didn't want to blame anyone for getting fooled by marking the SMB2 code as broken in Linux 3.6 (and earlier kernels? can't remember) ; I just wanted to clarify why I didn't write about it.
Ah, you actually read the code, others just relied on the site to write their articles.  Maybe we should add some crazy new feature to the wiki every release just to be able to tell the reporters apart :)
+Greg Kroah-Hartman :-) But I don't actually "read" it -- it's more looking for keywords in the commits and look a bit closer at the changes here and there; even that takes quite a while for ~10k commits every ~ten weeks

And as indicated in a earlier comment: I'm sure I did mistakes similar to the SMB2 one in my articles; it's to easy to miss a revert or a "depends on BROKEN" that is added in some harmless looking commit.

And BTW: without the in-depth articles about bigger changes (often written before the changes actually hit mainline) at my life would be a lot harder. That's why I often link to them and hope that some of those that read the stuff I write become subscribers at sooner or later
Ouch, it was me who got fooled and mentioned the SMB2 support in, and I didn't noticed it until I found this note in Google today. I've added a big warning, and I will add another for the next release (a good excuse to sell a single feature as new twice, like professional marketers!) . The release caught me without the text ready, and I didn't have time to check it all. BTW, I think you do a great work in your articles.
Add a comment...