Re: [Samba] 100GB incremental backups
The backup software uses the Unix ctime value of files when checking Can you set the backup software to use mtime instead? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Ghosting Linux Partitions.
This is a bit OT, but I have used Ghost with ext2 partitions with no problems whatsoever. I'm not sure if ext3 is supported or not. Same diff; any ext2-based tools work just fine with a clean ext3 partition. So just make sure to shut down cleanly before using ghost. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Thanks Samba Community!!!
So it isnt the rpm packaging per se, but I would bet that it is related. RH did a lot in 8 and I think it was overly ambitious. It's pretty much a rule of thumb to *never* use a RedHat .0 release. Believe it or not 8.0 was a lot better in this respect than many previous ones. Hopefully 8.1 is out soon since 7.3 (which I've been *very* impressed with) is EOL'd at the end of this year. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Re: Re: Hiding a share
Correct. That is why samba has a 'browseable = [ Yes | No]' option. Go figure. Which, in turn, leaves the share still visible in Network Neighborhood etc, as I initially reported. Go figure. :) IMX browseable = No in the share section doesn't hide the share from appearing in Net Neighborhood (didn't test to see if it hides the *contents* of the share--i.e. if you need to know full path into the share to access files in it.) browseable=No in the global section works as expected. This is with 2.2.7a; YMMV, NRWS, DNEYS, etc. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] forcing smbmount to unmount question
is there any way to force it to unmount? You can first try using lsof to see what's open on that mount. Failing that: umount -f -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] RE: NEWBIE Samba installation issues
I did what Gabriel suggested and it didnt' find a C compiler as most of you have said to me.I'm using redhat 7.3 currently on my system and I would of thought that a C compiler would of been installed with it??? But since this isn't the case... I'll have to find a c compiler first before i can do anything else by the sounds of things. Can anyone suggest where to look for one keeping in mind that I don't have a compiler? You probably didn't install development packages when installing RedHat. Install the gcc package from your redhat disc. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] smbfs and lfs (2.4.20)
is there a reason for this ? and: is there a patch for 2.4.20 (i only found an old patch for 2.4.16) The smbfs maintainer's page is at: http://www.hojdpunkten.ac.se/054/samba/ 2.4.18 patch applies fine to 2.4.20. Be sure to also apply the patch to the samba sources and recompile smbmount. The 2.2.3a patch applies to 2.2.7a okay. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Unable tp map to a samba share from home
I have a filtered restriction on port 139 Why ? *puts on mindreader cap* I suspect what you're trying to say is that you have a samba server running at home (as a guess--on comcast's cable modem service) and are trying to access it remotely, but it fails because port 139 is filtered. *If* that is the case, I would further suspect that comcast is intentionally filtering smb/cifs traffic on their net so as to somewhat impede rampant file trading and also to protect folk who run unsecured windows machines on their networks. Those boxes get rooted, customers blame comcast. Worse, those boxes become DDoS zombies, *everyone* blames comcast. SMB over the Internet is a Bad Idea IMO. Look into a VPN or SSH tunnel if you *really* need it. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Restrict access to [homes] share
I would like to restrict access so that a user can only read/write to their own share only. As others mentioned filesystem permissions and path statements can help. For me valid users = %S works just great. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] 2.2.7a - lot of open/close calls
I'me trying to track down a performance problem as I posted yesterday and as I increase the log level I've noticed this... [2003/02/21 08:19:06, 2] smbd/open.c:open_file(245) dm389245 opened file mr00257.bat read=Yes write=No (numopen=1) [2003/02/21 08:19:06, 2] smbd/close.c:close_normal_file(213) dm389245 closed file mr00257.bat (numopen=0) why does samba open and close the file so many times? this is the login script file it is opening btw *Samba* is not opening and closing the file that many times; the client side is. COMMAND.COM and cmd both process batch files one line at a time; I haven't tested this but I suspect cmd opens the file, reads a line, closes the file, executes the line. You can check this for yourself from the Windows side with filemon: http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/source/filemon.shtml -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba, rsync and a newbie sorting it out...
I'd like to use rsync as a way to back up Windows devices on a network, pulling data off of the Windows boxes and putting it onto a Samba share. Is this even possible? I suspect I either need some sort of rsync implementation on Windows (ha!) or I need to have Samba know to reach into the boxes and get the info for rsync-ing. Doable? A fool's errand? I'd recommend installing rsync (http://optics.ph.unimelb.edu.au/help/rsync/rsync_pc1.html) on the windows machines, installing PuTTY (http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/), creating ssh keys for the windows machines to log into the BSD box, and make a scheduled task on the windows machines that'll fire off and rsync to the BSD box. No samba involved. The naive might consider sharing out the relevant directories on the Windows machine, mounting them on the BSD machine, and then rsyncing locally. Unfortunately that involves pulling all of the files over the network and so rsync gains you nothing. If you wish, you could install a full cygwin environment, including an ssh server, install rsync into that (http://optics.ph.unimelb.edu.au/help/rsync/), and have the BSD box do the reaching out via a cron job. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba, rsync and a newbie sorting it out...
Uh, not quite. If you use rsync to only copy modified files and not all files after the first backup then you DO still get some benefit from rsync. True. I'm not sure what you mean by pulling all of the files over the network. What I mean is that partial transfers of modified files, one of the main advantages of rsync, won't happen--e.g. 2MB file foo has minor change. When running rsync entirely on the BSD box, checksums are run across the entire 2MB of the local copy, then across the entire 2MB of the copy on the windows machine--which involves pulling the entire 2MB over. That being said, I do much prefer your solution of using putty and ssh on the windows machine. It is much cleaner. ssh.com's clients could also be used for this and they are free for home use last time I looked. Could be wrong. I've been insanely happy with PuTTY; full-featured and completely unencumbered license-wise. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba:connection only works one time
using samba 2.2.5; security=server connecting as user1 (user logged in on PC) works (12:28:55), disconnecting and connecting as another user2 (not the user logged in on PC) works too (12:30:22), but disconnecting and connecting again as user1 (user logged in on PC) fails (12:34:29) as well as user2 (12:38:19). It seems it works only once and never again after one time logged in as user2 ? My experience (and, based on feedback from the list, others' experience) is that security=server Just Doesn't Work in any reliable fashion. It's just a really, really nasty hack. Use security=domain if at all possible. Otherwise you'll have to figure out some other approach. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] CUPS or LPRng?
Not only did it fix their issues, but it gives them a nice web-based administration interface where they can delete jobs if one does happen to get stuck. Setup was much easier than I thought it would be and definitely easier than LPRng if you haven't done work with lpd before. We were using HP Laserjet printers which were natively supported by CUPS. As a counterexample I had a *hell* of a time getting CUPS going and the web interface still dies on me whenever I try to do anything from it. Now that it's configured though it's been solid and reliable as long as I stick to command line. CUPS really seems to be the wave of the future though and certainly a lot of the filter/driver support is centered on it. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] CUPS or LPRng?
To be fair, I'm using Debian, so I used the .deb packages. They went in with no hassle. You may have a hard time with it using a lesser distro. :-) Ooooh, them's fighting words :) I've been running Debian for about five years now but I do install everything from source. FWIW the main problem was in documentation--the CUPS documentation isn't exactly good about telling you when/how to install postscript filters. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba/Windows XP and SSH tunnelling
I'm using PuTTY as an SSH client and it works fine. I can connect to the samba server and port forward port 139 without any problems. Are you forwarding *just* 139? Can you provide a list of everything you're forwarding, what it's forwarding to, etc? Perhaps as a plink command line? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] version 2.2.7
Is the version samba_2.2.7 betther than samba_2.2.2 ? Is recommended the upgrade? It's bigger, so it must be better, right? Take a look at the changelog (WHATSNEW.txt in the source distro) to see what's changed that might affect you. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Windows 2000 Terminal Server Environment
I am running Citrix Metaframe XP on Windows 2000 server and would like to have the ability to access files on my AIX Unix server. Are there any issues with Samba in a Windows Terminal Server environment? In addition to the suggestions already given: 1) Run the latest Samba 2.2.7a--there are some problems in 2.2.5 with opening certain files (especially databases) over the samba share. This comes up rather dramatically in multi-user environments 2) Run at least SP2 on the terminal server. There were a few fixes (not all available as separate hotfixes) pertaining to multiple users on one terminal server having the same file open on the smb server--if one user closed the file, it was closed for all. Otherwise I've been very happy with this configuration (although we're using Linux on the samba end). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Smbmount for Solaris 8?
I see that smbmount is for Linux only. smbmount relies on kernel support for the smb filesystem which (to the best of my knowledge) isn't in Solaris. I believe you can use smbclient to copy files in an FTP-like fashion. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Disappearing Windows machines ...
After I enable Samba on my Linux box, the windows machines on the network slowly (over hours) start disappearing from view of the network neighbourhood and windows services provided by windows machines become inaccessible too. Within 24 hours, windows services are totally crippled. Add the following to the global section of smb.conf: local master = no for some reason samba as the master browser results in Not Happy Things, at least in my experience. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] File size limit = 2G?
So it appears that Samba supports large filesystems, but not large files. Is this a configuration issue or a 32bit limitation in Samba?? This isn't a samba (server) issue; rather it's an smbmount and kernel (client) issue. You need the patches at http://www.hojdpunkten.ac.se/054/samba/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Fw: Neu Textdokument (2)
The virus message came from the SAMBA EMAIL SERVER to me as well as many others. I don't need to read many messages about how someone's email server caught a virus that was passed through the SAMBA EMAIL SERVER by someone posting to the list. It's not the listserv's problem that we got spammed; it's the idiot autoresponders. Heck, the samba list doesn't even munge the from line so there's really no excuse to send the message to the list. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] help quick answer
like this smbmount //SERVER/public /server/public/ -o codepage=cp850 -o guest ask me for passwod but smbmount //SERVER/public /server/public/ -o guest don't smbmount //s/p /s/p -o guest,codepage=cp850 (pardon the abbreviation to avoid line wrap) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] RE: xp doesnt log out
'%u' is samba specific. Although you would probably be able to use '\\server\%username%' (This would use the windows username). That is, \\server\%%username% or, in a batch file, \\server\%%%username% Tricky buggers, those %'s :) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Group file ownership...
set this in your share configuration force group = users Is there any way to force the group ownership of created files? Also, is there any way to force file ownersip to a given user on newly created files? You can also do this on the filesystem level by setting the UID or GID bits on a directory. Then all new files created in that directory will have the same owner or group, respectively, of the directory. Useful if you want different directories within a share to be handled differently. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] is use rhosts = yes still supported?
It seems like the first call into authorise_login never checks the rlogin (bails at checking for non-blank password in check_user_equiv) and then drops into guest mode; there is then a second call which *does* check (and successfully finds the .rhosts entry) but by this point we're being a guest so it doesn't do me any good :) I need to have it be the same username as on the server to have permissions work out properly. Throwing in a few more DEBUG statements highlights the problem--for some reason the 2K server *never* passes down a username unless I use the share%username syntax. This works but doesn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling as I'd rather have it handled by logged in username. For now though it does the job. Why isn't there support for rhosts in security modes other than share? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] is use rhosts = yes still supported?
I simply cannot get use rhosts = yes to work; whether I have security set to user or share it will only work if I have the share set to public (and then it maps to the guest user). I do have .rhosts files set up with proper permissions and ownership; I can post details but if this isn't supposed to work anymore there's no point. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] security = server random failures
Sounds about standard for security=server. It's not a nice hack. Make sure nothing is timing out the connection. Well, it's straight over a crossover cable between two servers, so I can't *think* of anything offhand. Samba 3.0 includes more protections for security=server, but it is still fundamentally flawed. Why can't you use 'security=domain'? The 2K box isn't a domain controller, just standalone. Yes, eventually we'll migrate to The Right Way to do it (domain) but for now I'm going for quick hack (thus the rhosts approach from the other end). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] security = server random failures
I have a Windows 2K SP2 terminal server and a Samba 2.2.7a server. The Samba server uses security=server with the 2K terminal server as the password server. Users log in to the terminal server and attempt to access (always the same) share on the Samba box. When there are no sessions open to the Samba server the connection from the terminal server always works; subsequent connections (with the first one open) fail about 70% of the time. Log snippets (one success, followed by one failure, log level 1). [2003/01/15 15:57:55, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection(636) tyr (192.168.2.6) connect to service LEGAL as user test2 (uid=1014, gid=103) ( pid 529) [2003/01/15 15:57:56, 1] smbd/password.c:server_validate(1175) password server TYR.IMAGE.COM rejected the password I found in the mailing list archives the following tidbit from Andrew Bartlett, dated 13 Aug 2002: Don't use 'security=server' when you have a real PDC. That's what security=domain is for. Furthermore, due to bugs only (possilby) corrected in Win2k SP3 you must use Samba 2.2.5 or above, as the PDC will otherwise randomly refuse authenticaion. Does this statement still apply to 2.2.7a? I'm loathe to install SP3 because of EULA concerns and, of course, throwing big chunks of patches into a production server. Anything else that might make this work? --Jon Niehof, Paladigm Inc. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
