Wayne et al.,
Are these Win2k Server machines? (I also note that there are no WinNT
machines mentioned as part of your network). If so, EVERY Win2k Server is a
Domain Controller (there are no such beasts as PDCs or BDCs in a Win2k
environment).
I was going to suggest (with Dan) that Samba may be losing out to the Win2k
machines. If this was the case, adding:
os level = 101
domain master = yes
local master = yes
preferred master = yes
to smb.conf might fix it.
HOWEVER, you also mentioned that other Win2k shares ARE still visible, so I
suspect this to be a permissions problem on your new Win2k boxes. There are a
few areas to check:
- Are the Win2k machines "on the air"? ie. do they have the correct IP
address for your subnet? Note that Win2k machines will give themselves a
private IP address if they're set up for DHCP and for some reason couldn't
find a DHCP host when they fired up.
- Ditto Dan's suggestion to check workgroup/domain settings
- Win2k will run with the least open permissions on files/folders. Check that
the folder(s) you're sharing aren't inheriting more restrictive permissions
from folders above them
- Does the Everyone user have full control of the shared folder(s) and the
files in them?
HTH
Steve
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 06:45, you wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> > If you have win9x and winNT machines you'll have to add the NetBEUI
> > protocol to the network settings of all the machines...
>
> NO!! You do NOT need to do this and doing so will actually only add to the
> problems. NetBIOS name resolution works perfectly fine over TCP/IP.
Agreed
>
> Linux would not be blocking anything because, as you said, this is a
> Windows to Windows thing. Are all the machines using the same
> workgroup/domain name? Are the Win2K boxes set to think that they are the
> domain masters? My guess is that it is probably something like that.
> Either that or there is some issue with the "elections" as far as which
> machine gets to build the list of available shares. The Win2K boxes may
> think they should win the election, while Samba does, too.
I don't think this is the issue (see above).
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 02:24, Wayne wrote:
> I apologize that the following problem may not be related to e-Smith
> installations or this discussion group, but I'm not sure if Linux / e-Smith
> is the cause. I encountered a problem when I first added a couple of
> Win2000 machines to my network of assorted operating systems. I found the
> answer in a UseNetgroup but subsequently lost the answer and need it for
> some additional Win2000 machines.
>
> For some reason, I cannot see shared folders on my Win2000 machines. The
> folders are shared with no restrictions. I'm not using the $ sign to hide
> the share. The share and folder name is less than 8 characters. It is a
> FULL share, not just read only. My LAN is a mixture of Win95, Win98,
> Win2000 and the server is of course Linux / e-Smith
>
> If I remember correctly, the last time I had to activate something in
> Control Panel / Administrative Tools. The shares on the machines I
> corrected before ARE still visible, I just can't remember what I need to do
> to make the new machines shares visible. Since this problem usually
> surprises those in a purely MS platform, I'm wondering if the adjustment
> needed is to overcome something Linux may be blocking?
>
--
Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues
Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
