similar to: RE: smbfs wrong file size

Hi team, i've got a behaviour that i can't explain at all i'm running a Linux, debian unstable, samba packages version is 3.0.2a, kernel versions are 2.4.22 / 2.6.1 and 2.6.4. FS is XFS. when i mount a share on an HP-UX/ASU server, i can see files with their real size, but when i try to copy them on my HD it appears to be 4GB ! When i try to open a file directly from remote, it's

Hi, We are using samba in a mixed Linux/Windows environment. The server is a samba 3.0.2a PDC and the clients are Windows XP and Linux (debian). Debian version is unstable, a week old on all machines. The thing is that there seem to be several differences depending on which kernel we use on the clients. It looks like the differences are concentrated on the username / user rights part. I

Unfortunately that didn?t work for me! I think there may be a bug somewhere although its possible that I have done something wrong somewhere. My reason for saying this is everything works perfectly when the windows machine is "uploading" the files but not when rsync is copying them. Regards Nic Colledge colledge@dsl.pipex.com n.j.colledge@bradford.ac.uk -----Original

Hello, Samba-users, please don?t beat me, but I have to ask this question here, as I haven?t found an answer I can rely on until now. I am working on a solution for a backup-problem and one possible solution could be the use of smbfs/smbmount. I am testing that now, mounting a WinXPHome(sorry, testing ...)-share which is 20GB of size (8GB used) to my linux-box. The linux-box is a bit more

Hi - [problem] mount.smbfs is not working on 3.0.0beta3; it has been working thru 3.0.0beta2. When I re-install 3.0.0beta2, it works again. [configuration] *Linux host <hanako> Linux version 2.4.20-4GB-athlon (root@Athlon.suse.de) (SuSE Linux 8.2)) #1 Fri Jul 11 20:16:51 UTC 2003 *samba-3.0.0beta3 complied from source, with configuration option '--with-smbmount'. (same

First I will apologize for posting my patch here if this is not the correct place to post a patch. I know that smbfs is being removed, but we still use it and need it to work. We have a patch to contribute back to the smbfs in the 2.6 kernel. I have noticed multiply posts on this issue and we have basically patch the smbiod.c to fix the reconnect bug in 2.6 Something we did for our patch is

Hello I have updated my version of how to get "nls" working in smbfs for the changes made in the 2.2.16pre2 Linux kernel (both nls and smbfs). It is now a bit smaller and perhaps cleaner (except for the CONFIG_SMB_NLS, that could be removed, and the nls_utf8 abuse :) Also, it now uses an ioctl to set the codepages to use (borrowed from the work by Artem V. Ryabov). This allows you to

I apologize because I know that this has surely been dealt with and documented before, but I cannot find it anywhere on the samba website, nor did a google search produce anything. For future reference, some type of advanced search option for the mailing list archives would be great. I tried the old google "error" "site:site.to.search" and it didn't find anything

Hi all, I'm just wondering why smbmount allows the same mount point to mount several times the same share while a normal mount operation (with a non-smbfs) returns a busy mount point error. [luca@fluca:~]$ mount ... //server/sys on /mnt/target type smbfs (rw) [luca@fluca:~]$ smbmount //server/sys /mnt/target/ -o ip=192.168.4.1,guest [luca@fluca:~]$ mount ... //server/sys on /mnt/target type

Using RHL 6.0 (2.2.5 kernel) with Win95 systems, smbfs doesn't recognize (immediately) changes made on the remote the remote system by a user on the remote computer. After a share has been mounted, if some computer other than the computer using smbfs to mount the share adds/removes a file to a directory in the share, an 'ls' of the mounted directory doesn't show the new/removed

I've been working with smbfs/smbmount the last few weeks to allow my linux log processing server access to the logs on our NT servers. The problem is that after a period of time all the smbfs mounts become invalid with either one of two errors. When you do a 'df -k' to view the mounts you see the following: samba:~# df -k Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use%

This seems like it should have an obvious answer, but I haven't seen a clear word one way or the other in the man pages or other documentation that I have read - is smbmount's behavior in any way governed by the smb.conf file? The reason I ask is one of the other sysadmins here has been trying to figure out ways to improve smbfs performance, and he came across the speed.txt file in

Hello, when i compiled latest linux 2.6.4 kernel source with gcc 3.3.2 on Linux/x86, i got a few warnings about varaibles beeing compared against constants where the range of the variable is so that the expression is always constant. The explicit comparison has to do with the code for high-uid and gid sheme. attached you will find a diff which does eliminate this error message by introducing an

Hello, I'm using the newest Samba 3.0.2a and smbfs which comes in 2.4.21 kernel. Sometimes or actually always when I copy, rsync or even list files from a share which resides on NT4 server all the files don't show up (only in directories which have lots of files >1000 files..) First I noticed this when I was rsyncing a "mirror" of this share to an another machine and rsync

I periodically see smbfs questions get asked on this list, and they usually get one of two responses: 1. smbfs is a kernel module; this list is not the appropriate place to be asking smbfs questions. 2. You should be using cifs instead. (Please let me know if either if these is incorrect.) I was surprised to see, however, that the smbmount / mount.smbfs manpage makes no mention of cifs as being

Hello all, I'm using samba 2.2.3a-12 from the debian woody distribution (kernel 2.4.18, ppc), and I have the following problem: The modification time returned by "ls" is wrong (tipically 1/1/1970), except when I directly access (1) one single file, (2) from outside of the mounting point. (A bit confusing, but I give an example below:) My mounting point is

I have a problem with smbmount. I have a linux server running E-Smith (or Mitel SME server as it is now) which is basically a cut down version of RedHat 7.0 (running Kernel 2.2.19-7.0.8smp). Samba version is 2.0.10. We are connecting to an NT server (service pack 3 - I must upgrade that sometime soon). We have quite a good tapedrive and backup software (3rd party) on the E-Smith server, whereas

I mounted //winxp/linuxbu onto to a 2nd new mountpoint called /mnt/buonwinxp. I got same errors as you. So I first verified if password of the //winxp/linuxbu was wrong. With a wrong password, I got response as below: [root@treasury1 root]# smbmount //winxp/linuxbu /mnt/buonwinxp -o username=linuxbu uid=root gid=root rw Password : xxxxy 9982: session setup failed: ERRDOS - ERRnoaccess

Fellow SAMBA lovers: I've been using 'mount -t smbfs blah blah' for over a year to do backup/restore. I recently upgraded SAMBA from 2.2.2 to 2.2.3a and the NT Server I was attaching to from v4 to Win2k. Now 'mount -t smbfs' returns an error. However, smbmount with the same parameters works, so I just changed the scripts to use smbmount. I suspect it's the Windoze server

Hi! I have some problem with samba. The problem concerns the smbfs kernel module and smbmount. Smbfs makes other processes "hang". The only thing to do is to reboot the computer, not even "Kill -9" works. I use a Linux system with the Redhat 7.2 distribution. It runs on a AMD 500 K6-2 processor with a memory of 192MB. The kernel is an unmodified 2.4.9-31 from Redhat. I have