Dave, Some of the binaries get put into /usr/bin, and others in /usr/sbin. The ones in /usr/bin are ones that non-root users might have a reason to execute, such as smbclient, smbpasswd, etc. /usr/sbin will not be in their $PATH, and so won't be found. The ones that go into /usr/sbin would be things like nmbd, smbd, swat, etc.
During the "make install" process, Samba will detect existing module names, and rename them to .old. So no, the fact that the binaries were already in one place would not be the reason they got installed in /usr/bin. Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Dave Myers [mailto:dave.myers@;twcable.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 10:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Error during Samba 2.2.6 make In a message dated 10/23/2002 4:07:46 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Dave, > > Make sure the Makefile includes a "-lcrypt" parameter for the > compiles/links. If it is already there, make sure you have a > /lib/libcrypt-x.y.z.so file. It should have been part of the glibc package > on your system. > > Mark Post > Thanks Mark, I deleted the /usr/local/samba/2.2.6 files & dirs and started over, and it worked ok. Found it odd though that even though I used the SuSE spec file when I ran ./configure the binaries installed into /usr/bin instead of /usr/sbin. There were already samba binaries in /usr/sbin from a previous tar install, so do you think that is whey 2.2.6 was installed into /usr/bin ??? I copied and overlaid the binaries in /usr/sbin with the new 2.2.6 binaries from /usr/bin.... I hope that is ok?? Samba seems to be working ok. Dave
