On 27/01/10 16:49, Sam Morris wrote:
Would it be worthwhile making gvfs depend on the fixed version of
libsmbclient?
That would mean hardcoding the dependency (right now it's pulled in via shlibs).
Since I guess this was only broken for some versions of samba, and that the one
in stable is fi
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 16:11 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 11/01/10 09:42, Sam Morris wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 11:50 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >> Le dimanche 03 janvier 2010 à 14:25 +, Sam Morris a écrit :
> >>> I am also seeing this on my system at the moment. Browsin
On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 11:50 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 03 janvier 2010 à 14:25 +, Sam Morris a écrit :
> > I am also seeing this on my system at the moment. Browsing windows
> > shares in nautilus, has never been particularly reliable, but at the
> > moment it's not working at
yeah it's work since yesterday and the samba update...
i think you have made a good work
thank's
Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> Le dimanche 03 janvier 2010 à 14:25 +, Sam Morris a écrit :
>> I am also seeing this on my system at the moment. Browsing windows
>> shares in nautilus, has never been
Le dimanche 03 janvier 2010 à 14:25 +, Sam Morris a écrit :
> I am also seeing this on my system at the moment. Browsing windows
> shares in nautilus, has never been particularly reliable, but at the
> moment it's not working at all.
>
> Running 'gvfs-mount smb://workgroup' prompts for the sam
tag 563472 - l10n
tag 563472 + confirmed
thanks
I am also seeing this on my system at the moment. Browsing windows
shares in nautilus, has never been particularly reliable, but at the
moment it's not working at all.
Running 'gvfs-mount smb://workgroup' prompts for the same details as
nautilus doe
6 matches
Mail list logo
