[Samba] profiles for win98 + xp in same dir under home dir?
Urs Rau
urs.rau at uk.om.org
Fri Apr 18 09:20:18 GMT 2003
Does the following setup have any chance of ever working without to many
problems?
Our mix of ~ 40 workstations (win98se & xp pro) get the home drive
mapped in the netlogon script when connecting into the domain
for win9x
net use h: \\linux\homes
for win xp
net use h: \\linux\homes /persistent:no
relevant sections of our redhat 7.3 w/ samba 2.2.8 smb.conf are:
[global]
;; server name
netbios name = LINUX
;; we have win xp home as well that can't login to domain
security = user
domain admin group=@domadm
;;
;; Support for NT/2000/XP
;; Note: registry changes may still be necessary
;;
add user script = /usr/sbin/useradd -d /dev/null -g 100 -s /bin/false -M %u
;;
;; Support for Roaming Profiles
;;
logon drive=z:
logon home=\\%L\%u\profile
logon path=\\%L\%u\profile
;;
;; Domain logon support:
;;
domain logons=yes
logon script=logon.bat
domain master=yes
preferred master=yes
[homes]
comment=Your home directory
[netlogon]
path=/usr/local/samba/netlogon
comment=Domain logon service
browseable=no
read only=yes
write list=root
We have multiple users loging, one after the other throughout the day,
from the same workstations into the domain, but those same users also
occasionally login from the "other OS". (meaning even if their normal
machine is win xp pro, they might occasionally logon using a win98 machine)
BUT according to "smbstatus -b" we appear to be having a number of
"ghost" smbd sessions after running this setup for a few days. It
appears as if the workstations keep connections to the server open even
if those users have already logged of the machine and another user (or
users) have since logged in from that machine. And after about 3 days
everything comes to a crawl and we have to restart the samba server and
that on a dual p4 2.4GHz with 1GB ram but only around 40 users or so on
it at any time.
Is the way we have setup our profile share being under the users home
dir contributing to the problems we have? The samba 2.2 PDC FAQ made me
think that, but I am not sure I understood it correctly.
Any suggestions corrections instructions pointers or insults gladly
received.
Thanks.
--
Urs Rau
More information about the samba
mailing list