Instead of repartitioning you could create a filesystem inside of a file... http://freecode.com/articles/virtual-filesystem-building-a-linux-filesystem-from-an-ordinary-file .
Just a thought, Ricky On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Mauricio Alvarez < [email protected]> wrote: > Michael, > > I really don't want to repartition--again! But yes, your idea is > intresting. > > If there really isn't any other option (really? no-one has ever had this > problem in the past?), I was thinking of something like this: > * Inside each disk, at the root level, create a single directory, call it > ROOTDIR01 for DISK1, ROOTDIR02 for disk2 etc. > * Modify the entries in smb.conf like so: > [STORAGE01] > path = /mnt/DISK1/ROOTDIR01 > Guest OK = false > ... > etc... > > so, if no disk is mounted, we have only /mnt/DISK1 but no ROOTDIR01. If > the disk is mounted, the ROOTDIR01 is then visible and gets shared as > [STORAGE01] > > Also, the clients see [STORAGE01] as their root dir, ignoring the > ROOTDIR01 sub-level > > This is very crude, I wonder if it might work. > > > > Wouldn't it be very simple to just create a VERY small partition (e.g. > 10MB) on the main drive > > (the one that your system disk is on), and mount it on e.g. /mnt. > > > > Then, even if one of your disks can't mount for some reason, only this > very small partition will > > fill up => no problem for the rest of the system. > > > > You would still have to configure your other machines to handle disk > full failures and maybe > > subsequently try another share... > > > > > > > >Michael > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
