UUncategorized

ProxMox CIFS Share error “failed: error with cfs lock ‘file-storage_cfg'”

  • February 11, 2020
  • 1 minute read

You may have encountered the following error message when trying to mount a CIFS share from the web interface of your Proxmox server. If you run the following command below via SSH, you will get a little more detail. 

❯ pvesm add cifs pooter-linux-isos --server 192.168.2.9 --share linux-isos --username proxmox --password
Enter Password: *********
mount error(95): Operation not supported
create storage failed: error with cfs lock 'file-storage_cfg': mount error: Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g. man mount.cifs)

The issue is solved by running the command with –smbversion 2.0 or 2.1 or 3.0 as per this forum topic. For my Synology it was –smbversion 2.0 that worked.

https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/cifs-issue-error-with-cfs-lock-file-storage_cfg-working-now-but-shows-question-mark.45962/


Did you like this article?


0 Shares:
Share 0
Tweet 0
Share 0
Share 0
— Previous article

Upgrading Wordpress 3.2.1

Next article —

Clearing DNS Service Cache on Synology NAS

You May Also Like
UUncategorized

Exim4 and PHP and PHP-CGI mail() function using incorrect From: and applying Sender: headers.

If you're using Exim4 and PHP as a module or as a CGI with suexec. You may have noticed some issues with your mail. Specifically you would have noticed that either the "From:" header was using "nobody@machinename" or "user@machine name, its also possibly that you had an additional header called "Sender:". There are two things you need to do to fix this. You first need to make sure that your "php.ini" has the following value "sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail -t -i". Which is the default, double check this variable as it might be set to something else.
Read More
UUncategorized

AMD 64 2000+ vs Intel’s Atom: AMD’s 8-watt processor outperforms Intels Atom

Intel's Atom processor and AMD's 64 2000+ were pitted against each other. And the results were for once in favor of AMD.
In our Munich lab’s duel of the energy-savers, the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ beats the Intel Atom 230 in energy consumption and processing power. Each of the systems was based on a desktop platform. The Achilles heel of the Intel system is its old system platform with the 945GC chipset, while AMD offers a more modern 780G platform. The energy-saving solution from AMD offers more possibilities: it has three times as many SATA ports, possesses better onboard graphics performance, and can also support two monitors. Unlike the Intel solution, an HD resolution (1920x1200) with high picture quality is possible through DVI/HDMI ports. And early information suggests that the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ should cost close to $90.
Read the full article at tomshardware.com
Read More