On Feb 26 17:46, Cedric Blancher via Cygwin wrote: > On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 17:29, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin > <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote: > > I wasn't aware there are other projects using the undocumented NFS > > interfaces. As far as Cygwin is concerned, it would be the simplest > > thing to add a check for the "NFSv4" FS name and handle it accordingly. > > > > OTOH, there are other ways to differ between MS NFS and NFSv4 in > > fs_info::update(), for instance by checking the filesystem flags. > > > > MS NFS only sets FILE_CASE_PRESERVED_NAMES to TRUE, but no other > > flag. Therefore, if we know the flags, or a minimal set of flags > > NFSv4 sets, we can distinguish both NFS versions and ultimately add code > > handling NFSv4 different from MS NFS where necessary or prudent in the > > future. > > > > For an example of handling filesystems using the same FS name differently, > > see for instance the MINIMAL_WIN_NTFS_FLAGS in mount.cc: > > > > https://sourceware.org/cgit/newlib-cygwin/tree/winsup/cygwin/mount.cc#n391 > > This might not be trivial if we want to be generic and also include > the OpenText folks. ms-nfs41-client and the Exceed/OpenText NFSv4 > clients are completely different projects. > > But I just had a chat with Chuck Lever <chuck.le...@oracle.com>, maybe > ORACLE can find someone in Microsoft to get new WNNC_NET_* values > registered. > I would prefer the official way, e.g. get new WNNC_NET_* values > registered, instead of letting Cygwin suffer from more workarounds.
The WNNC type has nothing to do with the stuff in mount.cc. The first is used to handle share enumerating, the latter to handle files and dirs on a share. Corinna -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
