CIFS VFS: Error messages
On the solution:
In fstab, it'll never work to your satisfaction as you want:
- No errors in dmesg
- The shares to be mounted before log-in.
I see two solutions:
- Use Autofs instead of fstab as Autofs allows you to automatically mount directories on an as-needed basis thus allowing you to manage changes more easily afterwards then the next solution.
- Create a custom upstart script and put it in init.d/rc6.d This is the real solution, used for servers that mount nfs volumes, but it'll require you to get your hands dirty, understanding the Linux init process ("boot process" in non-*nix speak)
Let me know which path you want to take, or just accept this as an answer if the above is already enough to point you in the right direction.
kgallant
Updated on September 18, 2022Comments
-
kgallant almost 2 years
I'm running two Ubuntu systems, (12.04 on 64-bit AMD desktop system and 14.04 on a 64-bit Intel laptop), and have configured two CIFS drives to be mounted at system start-up following the instructions at
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MountWindowsSharesPermanently
I've configured these drives using the following entries in /etc/fstab:
//gbsfp1/kgallant /home/kgallant/nethome cifs credentials=/etc/samba/credentials,rw,iocharset=utf8,_netdev,uid=1000,gid=1000 0 0 //gbsfp1/share /home/kgallant/netshare cifs credentials=/etc/samba/credentials,rw,iocharset=utf8,_netdev,uid=1000,gid=1000 0 0
Both drives are always successfully mounted by the time I log in on either machine yet a series of error messages are always reported during system boot that say:
Jul 4 10:52:07 gbsdt1 kernel: [ 20.976113] CIFS VFS: Error connecting to socket. Aborting operation Jul 4 10:52:07 gbsdt1 kernel: [ 20.976509] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -101
These messages are repeated five to ten times in syslog and, in the case of the 14.04 machine, on the screen during system boot. It appears that both systems are attempting to mount the drives before network services are initialized which I believe is the root cause of the problem. Documentation suggests that the _netdev option would prevent this, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on either the 12.04 or 14.04 systems.
The network drives are provided by a Samba server running on a Fedora 14 machine.
Is there any way to delay mounting these file systems until after network services are available, (if, as I suspect, that is the cause of the problem)? Or any other suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
Output of ls /etc/rc*.d/
/etc/rc0.d: K01nxserver K09apache2 K10unattended-upgrades K20osspd K20speech-dispatcher K20xrdp K21postgresql README S20sendsigs S30urandom S31umountnfs.sh S35networking S40umountfs S60umountroot S90halt /etc/rc1.d: K01nxserver K09apache2 K20acpi-support K20kerneloops K20osspd K20saned K20speech-dispatcher K20xrdp K21postgresql README S30killprocs S70dns-clean S70pppd-dns S90single /etc/rc2.d: README S19postgresql S20kerneloops S20osspd S20speech-dispatcher S20xrdp S50rsync S50saned S70dns-clean S70pppd-dns S75sudo S91apache2 S99acpi-support S99grub-common S99nxserver S99ondemand S99rc.local /etc/rc3.d: README S19postgresql S20kerneloops S20osspd S20speech-dispatcher S20xrdp S50rsync S50saned S70dns-clean S70pppd-dns S75sudo S91apache2 S99acpi-support S99grub-common S99nxserver S99ondemand S99rc.local /etc/rc4.d: README S19postgresql S20kerneloops S20osspd S20speech-dispatcher S20xrdp S50rsync S50saned S70dns-clean S70pppd-dns S75sudo S91apache2 S99acpi-support S99grub-common S99nxserver S99ondemand S99rc.local /etc/rc5.d: README S19postgresql S20kerneloops S20osspd S20speech-dispatcher S20xrdp S50rsync S50saned S70dns-clean S70pppd-dns S75sudo S91apache2 S99acpi-support S99grub-common S99nxserver S99ondemand S99rc.local /etc/rc6.d: K01nxserver K09apache2 K10unattended-upgrades K20osspd K20speech-dispatcher K20xrdp K21postgresql README S20sendsigs S30urandom S31umountnfs.sh S35networking S40umountfs S60umountroot S90reboot /etc/rcS.d: README S25brltty S37apparmor S55urandom S70x11-common
-
kgallant over 9 yearsThanks for looking at this for me @Fabby. Output posted above.
-
Fabby over 9 yearsNo worries: When I post an answer, just upvote it! That's the best thank you you can give...
-
-
s3lph over 9 yearsThis does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post.
-
Fabby over 9 yearsMy bad... Correcting now.
-
kgallant over 9 yearsThanks @Fabby. I've installed and configured autofs and it works well. I agree that the init process is the 'proper' way of doing this and hope to explore this further one day when I have the time. Until then, autofs is more than adequate.