[Samba] samba + MacOS X
Milan Roubal
roubal at midlety.cz
Thu Oct 2 22:59:09 GMT 2003
Hi,
>
> Sorry, let me back up a little: I may have not answered your original
> question.
>
> The file sizes shown in OS-X are guessed 'physical' sizes. If you 'get
> info' (command-i) on a file, it will show you the actual file size in
> parentheses. The size in parentheses is what counts for most uses (like
> copying or CD burning). It looks like OS-X (or is this Samba?) is using
> the wrong block size (256k?) to calculate the total physical file size.
>
The block size depends on the filesystem size, so on my 1 TB filesystem
is the block size 16 MB!!!!. But what is interesting, when I use native
windows XP sharing, there is 4 kB block size. I am using samba 3.0.0
Please help me to solve this problem, I really need this solved.
Thanx for any answer
Milan Roubal
roubal at a-open.cz
> Here's a sample file I have on my server (remember that Mac's actually
> have two seperate files on the server for both data and resource forks):
>
> [root at drtheopolis raid]# stat adobejs.txt
> File: "adobejs.txt"
> Size: 364 Blocks: 8 IO Block: 4096 Regular File
> Device: 901h/2305d Inode: 60 Links: 1
> Access: (0666/-rw-rw-rw-) Uid: ( 501/ edge) Gid: ( 501/ edge)
> Access: Wed Jul 2 11:58:33 2003
> Modify: Wed Jul 2 11:58:33 2003
> Change: Mon Sep 22 16:29:25 2003
>
> [root at drtheopolis raid]# stat ._adobejs.txt
> File: "._adobejs.txt"
> Size: 1536 Blocks: 8 IO Block: 4096 Regular File
> Device: 901h/2305d Inode: 61 Links: 1
> Access: (0666/-rw-rw-rw-) Uid: ( 501/ edge) Gid: ( 501/ edge)
> Access: Wed Sep 24 15:35:14 2003
> Modify: Mon Sep 22 16:29:25 2003
> Change: Mon Sep 22 16:29:25 2003
>
> It seems like it should say that it takes up 8K in harddrive space and
> not 1MB. Does anyone know where this conversion get mangled?
>
> In any case, when I copy this file to the Mac, it suddenly 'shrinks' to
> the appropriate physical size of 8k (presumably because my local HD also
> has block sizes of 4K).
>
> Regarding your other question, Baltra is a patch for Netatalk which
> makes Netatalk store/access files in an OS-X style (vs. the proprietary
> way Netatalk does). It does UTF8 encoding using the 'iconv' library (I
> think Samba uses the same lib). That way the file names actually look
> the same for everyone (including Windows folks) and the resource forks
> are preserved regardless of whether you use SMB or AFP (or NFS for that
> matter). You can get more info on it here:
>
> http://www.baltra.org
>
> It's been 'beta' for a long time because there haven't been many changes
> or complaints. From my experience, it's been stable, but it's always a
> use-at-your-own-risk thing.
>
>
> Phil
>
>
> Milan Roubal wrote:
>
> >Thanx for answer, it might help. I will try to upgrade to the latest
3.0.rc
> >release
> >ane I will use some of your configs too. What is Baltra patched Netatalk?
> >Its patched for UTF8? Where can i find it? Is it safe for using in
> >production
> >enviroment? Do you have any Windows machines in your network? How they
> >handle UTF8?
> > Thanx for your help.
> > Milan Roubal
> >
> >
> >
>
>
More information about the samba
mailing list