[linux-cifs-client] Re: SAMBA no longer works (FC5 to FC5): READ op.

[Igor Chudov]

On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 02:34:41PM -0500, Steve French wrote:
> >Everything worked (except when SAMBA became CIFS, anonymous logons
> >stopped working), it was a read only share.
> Can you explain this more?  Do you mean mounts with an empty userid:
> 	userid=""
> or
> 	guest  

I tried absolutely all combinations, including empty userid or guess,
and it did not work.

> which simply means that we don't prompt for the password, but use the 
> userid specified on the mount (or the default).

No, samba chose to disregard the argument in mount and provided its
own.

> Earlier (presumably with smbfs) how were you specifying anonymous?

Yes, userid="", if I recall correctly.

I am now phasing Samba out in general because of all this, sadly.

i

> 
> 
> >Starting from a few days ago, it no longer works. I can still get
> >directory listings, mount the "shared drive", etc, however, when I
> >actually read the file (with cat, wc, mplayer etc) I get a strange
> >"permission denied" error. That happens even though the perms are all
> >good looking, I still cannot read. I think that I can open the file
> >descriptor for reading, but the actual read operation fails. 
> It looks like a known server bug introduced with Samba 3.0.23a and then
> fixed by Samba 3.0.23c (perhaps even earlier). The following e.g. should
> be ok:
> 
> http://mirror.linux.duke.edu/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/5/i386/samba-3.0.23c-1.fc5.i386.rpm
> 
> >After a while of frustration, I ditched SAMBA entirely and switched to
> >NFS, but I would like to know just what could have happened?
> >
> >(we have one dinky MS Windows computer at home, that we do not run a
> >lot, but it would be nice to have samba available, though it is not
> >hugely important)
> 
> Lots of reasons to stay with cifs->Samba  :)
> Post again if you run into problems with the updated Samba server.
>