samba - Feb 1999 - SWAT - should not touch "include=" Option

Hello,

in the swat man page there is a hint, which says that SWAT overides the
"include=" - Option. The problem is that we have a mixed environment
with
clients that are not connected to an NT-Domain so these clients uses a
different authentication "include=/usr/local/lib/smb.conf.%m".
I would really appreciate the SWAT tool but because of this lack we can't
use it. 

Isn't it possible or is there a way to leave the "include=" Option
as it is?

I think a lot of Samba users have this problem.


Michael Emrich
_________________________________________________________
Robert Bosch GmbH ; QI/LBS3-Rt; Postfach 1342; 72703 Reutlingen
Tel: (07121)/35-4018; Fax: -2687; Internet: Michael.Emrich@pcm.bosch.de

>Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:47:38 -0500
>From: ravi narayan <ravi@streamcenter.com>
[snip]
>i have two other systems: a windows nt 4.0 workstation PC, and a
>windows 98 PC. i have no NT domain. i modified the registry, as suggested
>in the docs, on both systems, to permit plaintext passwords.
>
>from both systems, i can now access the samba server. however, on the
>NT workstation system, the login process takes forever. when i map the
>network drive, it takes about 2-3 minutes after which i am prompted for
>a password. once i enter the password it takes another 2-3 minutes for
>the drive to be mounted. once it is mounted, it works well and there are
>no further problems. on the windows 98 system, there is no such problem,
>and the login process is blazingly fast!
[snip]
This sounds like a classic DNS problem to me. Your unix system is set up to
look for a DNS server that isn't there. I suspect your W98 system is in
/etc/hosts whereas your WNT system isn't. All IP operations will be
affected, not just Samba. Either disable DNS on the Unix system or put the
WNT system in /etc/hosts.

Best regards, Paul


Paul Sherwin Consulting
22 Monmouth Road, Oxford OX1 4TD, UK
Phone +44 (0)1865 721438
Fax +44 (0)1865 434331
Pager +44 (0)7666 797228

I'd suggest you might want to consider
throwing all these files into a database
instead - even a very simple MySQL database
with one table, two fields: title & data
would be relatively easy to set up, including
a Web interface.  (i.e. you can have the
files actually in the database, rather than
as tiny files all over your disk).

Hard to imagine any Windows File Sharing
scenario working well with that many files.
--
Bill Eldridge
Radio Free Asia
bill@rfa.org

When the world was young, Volker Lendecke 
<Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE> carved some runes like this:  
> Hank Burton writes:
> 
>  > ANY HELP / IDEAS would be greatly appreaciated.
> 
> Sounds like a permission problem on the unix side. Did you set 'write
ok > yes' in the share definition? Check the uid that's used on the
unix side
> with smbstatus, and check the unix permissions against that.
Sorry, but I'm pretty sure the share settings (writable=yes, write 
list, valid users, etc) will have no effect whatsoever if the 
underlying directory permissions are set incorrectly.  For example, 
on the last samba box I set up, I could not (as a "normal" user) 
write any files to the public shares I created (writing to the home 
share of that user worked fine).  I tried all the relevant smb.conf 
options I could think of, but I always got "Access Denied" or 
"Permission Denied" errors trying to create/copy files to those 
shares.  It finally dawned on me (sometimes it takes a while, but 
eventually I get it ;-) to check the underlying permissions and 
sure enough, those dirs were owned by root/group root.  When I 
changed the permissions to a different group (and added the users 
to that group) everything worked fine.  Granted, most of you (I'm 
sure) are not as dumb as I am, but this is one of the more subtle 
aspects of samba that seems to come back again and again...

Steve