I can only conclude that Samba is an elaborate hoax and here's why. 1) Setup is more complex than Sendmail (it set the standard for complexity) 2) Even the simplest smb.conf causes trouble 3) You can pass ALL the tests in the DIAGNOSIS procedure, AND Samba will still not let you SHARE FILES or SHARE PRINTERS between Windows and Unix but you WILL be able to BROWSE YOUR SHARES (Just pretend it might be useful) ====OK, I admit I'm annoyed. I have been working for too long to get this working with even the simplest smb.conf file and after I pass ALL the diagnostic steps (yes I have gone through every one with flying colours) here's what happens. On a W95 system, in a DOS box I do Test #9 net use X: \\lewis\tmp I'm asked for a password and get 'command completed successfully' So I have passed the test right? WRONG! Here's what happens when I try and do something with the new X: drive I change to drive x: and get>x:then I type DIR (and yes I type a carriage return in case some nitpicker thinks I jest) The result: W95 full seizure after a partial listing (yes, only some) of the files in /tmp The ONLY solution I have found for this seizure is a full power off reboot. (I have waited as long as a half hour to let W95 sort it all out. Perhaps the 'W95 team' can let me know if that's long enough) Same problem with Test #10 I try to 'browse the server' and the shares show up. I passed the test right? WRONG! Try a click on one of those shared resources and I get another full W95 system seizure and only pulling the plug will get me out of it. What would your conclusion be? There are no other troubleshooting tips provided by the 'Samba Team'. So I can browse but not share files (let alone printers). I tell you : SAMBA is a HOAX! I have posted my trouble on the local Linux user's groups but every 'solution' just shows that they don't have it working right either. Read the Samba digests - see any SOLUTIONS? If you got this far here's some info on my configuration: Samba versions tried: 1.9.17, 1.9.18, 2.0.0 Linux running on Redhat Ver 5.0 Win95 clients with all the latest patches (including the password fix - I can authenticate) testparm provides NO ERRORS my smb.conf (simple isn't it - hard to believe IT DOESN'T WORK) # Samba config file created using SWAT # from localhost (127.0.0.1) # Date: 1999/02/04 23:21:08 # Global parameters workgroup = AVANTEL netbios name = LEWIS interfaces = 192.168.0.1/24 192.168.1.1/24 log level = 2 guest account = guest [tmp] comment = Test path = /tmp And in case you got this far and are willing to help - how about a test procedure for going that extra step that lets me actually access shared files and then some tips for when it doesn't work. Unless of course, Samba really is a hoax!
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999 alex@avantel.com wrote:> I can only conclude that Samba is an elaborate hoax and here's why.[snip] How many client machines have you tried this on? It looks like your client(s) (is|are) thoroughly broken. Matthew.
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999 alex@avantel.com wrote:> > testparm provides NO ERRORS >That only checks for invalid configuration names (spelling) as far as I know. You can still set conflicting options in the file. As far as the diagnostics text file. I haven't read it in a long time so this stuff might be in there. Make sure your WinXX clients are only running tcp/ip not netbui (or whatever it's called). I remember something about WinXX machines confusing themselves when more than one protocol was bound to the MS client. I run the MS tcp/ip, NIC driver, MS Windows Client and nothing else. Here is a working smb.conf built by hand for a CVS version that I have on a production environment acting as a PDC for some NT workstations. A slightly modified copy also works on my home lan running on a RH5.1 server w/ samba 2.0.0 serving Win95 and Win98 clients. replace the your parts with your data [global] workgroup = your-domain server string = NT Domain Server log file = /path/to/your/log.%m max log size = 50 socket options = TCP_NODELAY hosts allow = your.net.address 127. security = user encrypt passwords = yes smbpasswd file = /path/to/your/passord/file load printers = yes printcap name = lpstat os level = 33 local master = yes domain master = yes preferred master = yes domain logons = yes wins support = yes dns proxy = yes logon path = \\%L\%U\WinNT\profile logon home = \\%L\%U logon drive = h: logon script = network.bat %m [homes] comment = Home Directories browseable = no writable = yes [printers] comment = All Printers path = /usr/spool/samba browseable = no guest ok = no writable = no printable = yes [netlogon] comment = Network Logon Service path = /path/to/your/system/netlogon/dir guest ok = yes writable = no share modes = no I have experieced no problems with the above setup. I hope this helps. ->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->---<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-< James Thompson 138 Cardwell Hall Manhattan, Ks 66506 785-532-0561 Kansas State University Department of Mathematics ->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->---<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999 alex@avantel.com wrote:> I change to drive x: and get > >x: > then I type DIR > (and yes I type a carriage return in case some nitpicker thinks I jest) > > The result: W95 full seizure after a partial listing (yes, only some) of > the files in /tmpSounds like you have an Interrupt problem with your network card.> I try to 'browse the server' and the shares show up. I passed the test right? > WRONG! Try a click on one of those shared resources and I get another full > W95 system seizure and only pulling the plug will get me out of it. > > What would your conclusion be? There are no other troubleshooting tipsSounds like you have an Interrupt problem with your network card. The troubleshooting tips assume you have a PROPERLY FUNCTIONING CLIENT. [Darrin] -- "I have no special gift. I am only passionately curious." - A. Einstein Darrin M. Gorski, Research Computer Systems Network Support Scientific Research Laboratories, Ford Motor Company Internet: dgorski@ford.com | Tel/Fax: +1 (313) 248-3753
Windoze luser - I presume
> I can only conclude that Samba is an elaborate hoax and here's why.Well.. why do you use it them... just switch to NT and spend your time rebooting your machine after nearly every action "for the setting to take effect" :-)> 1) Setup is more complex than Sendmail (it set the standard for complexity)Simply not true!... I asume you have NEVER even read an average sendmail.cf file> 2) Even the simplest smb.conf causes troubleWell .. I sugest reading the man-pages and using you brain> 3) You can pass ALL the tests in the DIAGNOSIS procedure, AND > Samba will still not let you SHARE FILES or SHARE PRINTERS between Windows > and Unix > but you WILL be able to BROWSE YOUR SHARES (Just pretend it might be useful)Well.. most people have samba up and running without ever looking at DIAGNOSIS.txt.... [Snip] Well.. Next time, just use a WORKING win95-client (hard to get.. i know) Or... even simplier: Just switch to nt... no need for using tcp/ip, just use netbeui (very simple to configure). Netbeui doesn't support routing, but who needs more than one subnet? Should be no problem for you to pay $1000 for 5 users..... Next time, before you mail flames about freeware, get yourselft a linux-machine with gcc, the program sources and START MAKING IT BETTER Greetings from Florian Pflug
Let me start by thanking the many people who replied to my cry for help. I received far fewer flames than expected and the majority of replies were helpful and supportive. I (think?) the problem is fixed but I do not understand what was broke. Here's what I found and what I did (I'm hoping someone understands why this worked) Since the listing of shared files on the Samba host (either in a dos box or with explorer) was causing my W95 client to freeze I decided to see if a particular file was causing the problem. After a 'net use x: \\sambahost\tmp' I switched to x: and instead of asking for 'dir' I used 'dir *.log' - NO FREEZE! And I got a listing of the 4 log files in the \tmp directory I kept this up until I found one single file that would cause my system to freeze (repeatable). So I removed that file from the \tmp directory and tried again. This time, no freeze. Everything worked as it was supposed to. So my question - is there any reason that a particular file should cause a failure such as the one I experienced. Here's the filename listing - there's nothing unusual about the file and it causes my system to freeze regardless of what's in the file (I deleted it initially and recreated it - same size, content unknown). If I re-insert this file into the \tmp directory I get my freezes back. -rw-r--r-- 1 root alex 31 Feb 6 10:51 000b208e.lpq (I changed it from the original lpq.000b208e to see if that made any difference but it did not.) Is this just a fluke or is there a reason that this could be the cause? I'm baffled. Alex