mount_smb: Mount failed: Not enough memory

I am trying to mount several remote file systems (6 to be exact). The 5th
on fails with
Mount failed: Not enough memory

Where isn’t there enough memory and what must I adjust to fix this?

sin in says I have 27 mb left in my system
sin ve says I have:
Proc32 4.25J Sept 9, 1999
Tcpip 5.00X Jan 28, 2000
SMBfsys 1.30I Dec 7, 1999

and ls -l shows
/bin/mount_smb Dec 8, 1999 35049 bytes long.

Sorry about the double post.
I didn’t think the first one went out.

We have no problems mounting more than five file systems, for what
that’s worth. SMBfsys uses ttyp’s - might you have run out of these?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

I am trying to mount several remote file systems (6 to be exact). The 5th
on fails with
Mount failed: Not enough memory

Where isn’t there enough memory and what must I adjust to fix this?

sin in says I have 27 mb left in my system
sin ve says I have:
Proc32 4.25J Sept 9, 1999
Tcpip 5.00X Jan 28, 2000
SMBfsys 1.30I Dec 7, 1999

and ls -l shows
/bin/mount_smb Dec 8, 1999 35049 bytes long.

WHAT!

Why would SMBfsys use ttyp’s?

A sin -PSMBfsys fd shows no file descriptors open to ttyp’s.
And for the record, SMBfsys is started before Photon and our Dev.pty driver.


Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5A4976.A657AD29@kramer-smilko.com

We have no problems mounting more than five file systems, for what
that’s worth. SMBfsys uses ttyp’s - might you have run out of these?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

I am trying to mount several remote file systems (6 to be exact). The
5th
on fails with
Mount failed: Not enough memory

Where isn’t there enough memory and what must I adjust to fix this?

sin in says I have 27 mb left in my system
sin ve says I have:
Proc32 4.25J Sept 9, 1999
Tcpip 5.00X Jan 28, 2000
SMBfsys 1.30I Dec 7, 1999

and ls -l shows
/bin/mount_smb Dec 8, 1999 35049 bytes long.

For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

WHAT!

Why would SMBfsys use ttyp’s?

A sin -PSMBfsys fd shows no file descriptors open to ttyp’s.
And for the record, SMBfsys is started before Photon and our Dev.pty driver.

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5A4976.A657AD29@kramer-smilko.com> …
We have no problems mounting more than five file systems, for what
that’s worth. SMBfsys uses ttyp’s - might you have run out of these?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

I am trying to mount several remote file systems (6 to be exact). The
5th
on fails with
Mount failed: Not enough memory

Where isn’t there enough memory and what must I adjust to fix this?

sin in says I have 27 mb left in my system
sin ve says I have:
Proc32 4.25J Sept 9, 1999
Tcpip 5.00X Jan 28, 2000
SMBfsys 1.30I Dec 7, 1999

and ls -l shows
/bin/mount_smb Dec 8, 1999 35049 bytes long.

Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com

For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Richard

Many, many other ways! Primary possibility - simple TCP/IP API…
ptys are usually used to convey “terminal” like characteristics to a remote
connection.
SMBfsys is “normally” used to mount a file system connected to the remote.
Connection protocol is SMB over NetBios over TCP/IP - interface to user is
resource manager? Where does the pty fit in??

If I do a “sin -PSMBfsys fd” it shows 5 TCP/IP Socket Connections
ESTABLISHED, fd 17 = //1/dev/null, fd 18 = //1/dev/con1.


Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com

For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

WHAT!

Why would SMBfsys use ttyp’s?

A sin -PSMBfsys fd shows no file descriptors open to ttyp’s.
And for the record, SMBfsys is started before Photon and our Dev.pty
driver.

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5A4976.A657AD29@kramer-smilko.com> …
We have no problems mounting more than five file systems, for what
that’s worth. SMBfsys uses ttyp’s - might you have run out of these?

Richard

Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

I am trying to mount several remote file systems (6 to be exact).
The
5th
on fails with
Mount failed: Not enough memory

Where isn’t there enough memory and what must I adjust to fix this?

sin in says I have 27 mb left in my system
sin ve says I have:
Proc32 4.25J Sept 9, 1999
Tcpip 5.00X Jan 28, 2000
SMBfsys 1.30I Dec 7, 1999

and ls -l shows
/bin/mount_smb Dec 8, 1999 35049 bytes long.

“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com> …
For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Many, many other ways! Primary possibility - simple TCP/IP API…
ptys are usually used to convey “terminal” like characteristics to a remote
connection.

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.

Richard

SMBfsys is “normally” used to mount a file system connected to the remote.
Connection protocol is SMB over NetBios over TCP/IP - interface to user is
resource manager? Where does the pty fit in??

snip

Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5B9DC4.96697024@kramer-smilko.com

“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com> …
For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Many, many other ways! Primary possibility - simple TCP/IP API…
ptys are usually used to convey “terminal” like characteristics to a
remote
connection.

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.

Weird!
Are they maybe being inherited from the parent task?
I don’t know why they would be there any more than you do, just clutching at
straws! :sunglasses:

Richard

SMBfsys is “normally” used to mount a file system connected to the
remote.
Connection protocol is SMB over NetBios over TCP/IP - interface to user
is
resource manager? Where does the pty fit in??

snip

Could it be that you started SMBfsys from within a pty? It might be
attaching descriptors to the pty for output (errors). I haven’t tried it
yet, but maybe set up your system to boot to a prompt, do NOT run Dev.pty
and try samba mounting. If it works, it probably doesn’t use pty’s.

As for running out of memory, is it the same mount point that causes the
memory failure each time? It’s a long shot, but I’m thinking the remote end
is producing the error.


“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” <steve@cormantech.com> wrote in
message news:93hr9t$3eu$1@inn.qnx.com

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B9DC4.96697024@kramer-smilko.com> …


“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com> …
For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Many, many other ways! Primary possibility - simple TCP/IP API…
ptys are usually used to convey “terminal” like characteristics to a
remote
connection.

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.


Weird!
Are they maybe being inherited from the parent task?
I don’t know why they would be there any more than you do, just clutching
at
straws! > :sunglasses:

Richard

SMBfsys is “normally” used to mount a file system connected to the
remote.
Connection protocol is SMB over NetBios over TCP/IP - interface to
user
is
resource manager? Where does the pty fit in??

snip

Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies <steve@cormantech.com> wrote in message
news:93hr9t$3eu$1@inn.qnx.com

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B9DC4.96697024@kramer-smilko.com> …

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.


Weird!
Are they maybe being inherited from the parent task?
I don’t know why they would be there any more than you do, just clutching
at
straws! > :sunglasses:

Richard

Hi Richard

I wonder is you just happened to load SMBfsys from a pty and you are seeing
it’s stdout?


Although curiously enough, mine shown /dev/con1 for fd 18!

R B Adler <request@mapson.com> wrote in message
news:93ih1f$fni$1@inn.qnx.com

As for running out of memory, is it the same mount point that causes the
memory failure each time? It’s a long shot, but I’m thinking the remote
end
is producing the error.

I posted the original question. What I found so far was that by adjusting
the order that I try to mount things and putting in a few sleeps between
them, I am able to get everything to mounted. I am sure that this is an
extreamly fragile scenario, but I don’t have the time to experiment with it
further this week. Maybe on the weekend.

“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B9DC4.96697024@kramer-smilko.com> …


“Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies” wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B6033.7E2D07A6@kramer-smilko.com> …
For each new machine with a mounted share, a pty is used. How else
will it talk over a network?

Many, many other ways! Primary possibility - simple TCP/IP API…
ptys are usually used to convey “terminal” like characteristics to a
remote
connection.

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.


Weird!
Are they maybe being inherited from the parent task?
I don’t know why they would be there any more than you do, just clutching at
straws! > :sunglasses:
No - definitely not. Here’s what I did:

SMBfsys & from a console
sin -PSMB => no ptys
mount_smb => a pty showed up
mount_smb [another share on the same remote] =>still only one pty.
mount_smb [on a second remote] => two ptys.

After some time (1/2 hour?) I checked and SMBfsys had no ptys as fds.
I then did an ls /smb/rrk/c [one of the mounted shares] and now
SMBfsys has opened a pty.

Richard

SMBfsys is “normally” used to mount a file system connected to the
remote.
Connection protocol is SMB over NetBios over TCP/IP - interface to user
is
resource manager? Where does the pty fit in??

snip

See my answer to Steve above.


Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

Steve Munnings, Corman Technologies <> steve@cormantech.com> > wrote in message
news:93hr9t$3eu$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5B9DC4.96697024@kramer-smilko.com> …

OK. However, being a cautious sort, I checked “sin -PSMB fd” before
I wrote the above, and SMBfsys does use ptys, at least on my machine.


Weird!
Are they maybe being inherited from the parent task?
I don’t know why they would be there any more than you do, just clutching
at
straws! > :sunglasses:

Richard

Hi Richard

I wonder is you just happened to load SMBfsys from a pty and you are seeing
it’s stdout?

Although curiously enough, mine shown /dev/con1 for fd 18!

Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5CEB0C.2C22ED18@kramer-smilko.com

SMBfsys & from a console
sin -PSMB => no ptys
mount_smb => a pty showed up
mount_smb [another share on the same remote] =>still only one pty.
mount_smb [on a second remote] => two ptys.

After some time (1/2 hour?) I checked and SMBfsys had no ptys as fds.
I then did an ls /smb/rrk/c [one of the mounted shares] and now
SMBfsys has opened a pty.

Richard

Curious.

After a period of inactivity (not accessing remote file systems) I did a sin
fd. I see a number of fd’s open on /dev/null. As I accessed each of my
remote file systems one by one, each of those /dev/null entries changed to a
TCP/IP socket fd.

(Ya learn something every day!)

What version of SMBfsys are you running?
I’m running SMBfsys v1.30I dated Dec 12, 1999.

Maybe one of us needs to upgrade.

Major RETRACTION.
There are NO PTYs here associated with SMBfsys. Whatever affliction
brought on my comments to the effect that SMSfsys uses ptys seems to
have worn off. I hope that I have not caused too much wasted time.

Richard


Bill at Sierra Design wrote:

Richard R. Kramer <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3A5CEB0C.2C22ED18@kramer-smilko.com> …
SMBfsys & from a console
sin -PSMB => no ptys
mount_smb => a pty showed up
mount_smb [another share on the same remote] =>still only one pty.
mount_smb [on a second remote] => two ptys.

After some time (1/2 hour?) I checked and SMBfsys had no ptys as fds.
I then did an ls /smb/rrk/c [one of the mounted shares] and now
SMBfsys has opened a pty.

Richard

Curious.

After a period of inactivity (not accessing remote file systems) I did a sin
fd. I see a number of fd’s open on /dev/null. As I accessed each of my
remote file systems one by one, each of those /dev/null entries changed to a
TCP/IP socket fd.

(Ya learn something every day!)

What version of SMBfsys are you running?
I’m running SMBfsys v1.30I dated Dec 12, 1999.

Maybe one of us needs to upgrade.

Very Interesting!

New issue:

If a connection has been established to a remote host and then that
connection is broken, is there an automated way to have it reconnect when
the connection can be re-established.

We have several offices and SMB connections to each of them. Normally these
connections are up for days/weeks/months, etc at a time. If the remote
office is rebooted (WOW, did you ever see someone boot a whole office!) then
our connection needs to be manually re-established. Our ‘current’ shell
scripts will slay ALL connections and re-establish then all. This of course
has it’s own major drawbacks. While we should obviously have smarter shell
scripts, the auto-reconnect would be a very nice feature.

Richard R. Kramer <rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> wrote in message
news:3A5F4966.7CDB1A5@kramer-smilko.com

Major RETRACTION.
There are NO PTYs here associated with SMBfsys. Whatever affliction
brought on my comments to the effect that SMSfsys uses ptys seems to
have worn off. I hope that I have not caused too much wasted time.

Richard