mounting windows drives

Urban Widmark urban at
Sat Jul 15 22:26:07 GMT 2000

On Sun, 16 Jul 2000, Wayne wrote:

> Is smbmount all I need to mount my windows-drives to be visible to linux? Which
> version?

You need smbmount and a kernel that has smbfs compiled in or as a module.
(/lib/modules/$version/fs/smbfs.o would be a likely place)

You want to eventually run 2.2.16 and not the version that came with
RH6.1. 2.2.16 has a few fixes for smbfs compared to pre-2.2.14.

I believe RH has rpms for upgrading this (actually I think upgrading to
RH6.2 might be easier than fixing RH6.1 ... but it's certainly possible)

> Does tcp_wrapper replace smbmount and should I use tcp_wrapper instead? Which
> version? and where should I get it.

tcp_wrapper is something completely different.

> Can I do this without installing samba 2.0.7?

Yes, but you will suffer from some minor bugs in smbmount that will force
you to unmount and mount again after a while. 2.0.7 is better at this, but
not perfect. For testing if it works at all, the default packages should
be just fine.

> If installing 2.0.7 is advisable, what is involved in installing samba2.0.7
> onto redhat?

You can install it from the tar.gz. It will then end up in
/usr/local/samba (unless you place it somewhere else) which is fine except
that none of the redhat stuff will understand that samba is installed.

> I downloaded the samba-2_0_7.tar.gz file but on listing the contents (tar -t -z
> ..) it does not look like something the Redhat Package Manager will use. Is
> there an RPM package of samba 2.0.7? Where? ?

You could also take the source RPM (SRPM) from the RedHat version you have
and modify the .spec file to compile 2.0.7 instead (shouldn't be too
hard). That should give you an upgraded version with identical installation

Or you could compile the SRPM from your local samba mirror (I believe this
is a different package than the RH even if it says redhat here).


More information about the samba mailing list