> I hope this doesn't displace Samba. It doesn't seem to be the objective. For one, this is a very old version of SMB protocol (v3, while SMB doesn't have big

> I hope this doesn't displace Samba. It doesn't seem to be the objective. For one, this is a very old version of SMB protocol (v3, while SMB doesn't have big releases anymore the current one is v4). Also, Samba have the user space tooling that this project explicitly doesn't want to reimplement. And it seems that both implementations are compatible with each other. It does seem to me that the main objective here is to have a very efficient implementation of SMB for embedded devices.