samba headaches

[Steve Gonzales]

I really apologize for the need of the original email posted below.  I don't
know what got into this person; but whatever it is, I sincerely apologize if
it was something I said.

I thought that this list was a serious discussion of Samba.  Sometimes NT
stuff does appear in this forum; however, consider the numbers of LANs that
integrate either NT into Linux networks and visa versa.  I realize that
there is another forum, samba_ntdom, that is there to specifically address
Linux/NT issues; however, on rush decision times, the more information one
has, the better an educated guess he/she can make about what to do next to
correct problems.

With that said, I don't think that sarcasm is part of the equation.  I want
to visit the "Argument Room" not the "Abuse Room" (ala Monty Python).

BTW, tpaul, my network  _is_  flat and I inherited a network in which our
original RedHat 6.2 Linux dialin server  _did_  act right in an NT domain
network.  I am trying to replicate this on a new server using RedHat 7 and
all that came with it.  As many people are finding out, there are great
differences btn 6.2 and 7.0, not the least of which is the Samba suite.
Also, if Samba and NT do not work together, why have these forums?

That is all.
Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: TPsmith at ixl.com [mailto:TPsmith at ixl.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:32 AM
To: gonzo at eng.lsu.edu; samba at us5.samba.org
Subject: RE: samba headaches


and the networking and multiple subnet issues of using SAMBA continue.
Steve and Charles, welcome to the wonderful world of SAMBA. What you need to
do, to use SAMBA, is put your SAMBA on Unix box that is in walking distance
of your win32 machines, on the same subnet, and never ever put the server on
a different subnet or move it far from the users.  SAMBA is NOT an
enterprise solution for file access, when going from a win32 box to a
Unix/Linux SAMBA server.  It just doesn't Work!  I became a serious Unix
administrator over the past year, I am of course, still learning ALOT, what
I did learn, from trying to get SAMBA working, from Win32 boxes to
SAMBA-Unix box, is forget it, unless the network is "flat" and/or you are
right next to the server.
Unix is great, but for having users, already on a Windows network, using
windows clients, just use a WINDOWS server, when part of the server's
function is file sharing.... I am tired of fight SAMBA, I am sure I am not
the only one.


tpaul

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Gonzales [mailto:gonzo at eng.lsu.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:29 AM
To: samba at us5.samba.org
Subject: RE: samba headaches


I have the same problem.  You could (grimace (-< ) copy your smb.conf to a
floppy and carry it to your email box.

I'd be interested in comparing smb.conf files.
Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: samba-admin at us5.samba.org [mailto:samba-admin at us5.samba.org]On
Behalf Of Charles Williams ( CEO ACNS )
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 7:16 AM
To: samba at us5.samba.org
Subject: samba headaches


Hello,

I have a slight problem with browsing a samba server.  I can see the server
(www) in network neighborhood but when I click on it to see the shares I get
that the network is busy or some such.  I get this error with ever win32
system on the network.  I don't have another linux box at the moment to test
with linux.  I would love to say that below you will find the samba config
but I have no access to the net from the linux box at the moment and can't
copy across the network. hehe.  Any ideas?

Thanks.