[Samba] recycle: ... returned No such file or directory

[Linda W]

Helmut Hullen wrote:
> Hallo, Linda,
> Just for the record:
>         grep charset /etc/samba/smb.conf
> tells on my system (since many years, from 3.0.x to now 4.1.6)
>         dos charset = CP1252
> and     testparm -sv 2>/dev/null | grep charset
> tells   dos charset = CP1252
>         unix charset = UTF-8
> The unix charset is (as "testparm -sv" tells) pr-set to UTF-8
>   
----
    That's the default according to the manpage.

> What does your option "display charset"?
>   
====
Here, let let me do a "man smb.conf" for you... ....um...  here we are:

      display charset (G)

           Specifies the charset that samba will use to print messages to
           stdout and stderr. The default value is "LOCALE", which means
           automatically set, depending on the current locale. The value
           should generally be the same as the value of the parameter unix
           charset.

           Default: display charset = "LOCALE" or "ASCII" (depending on the
           system)

           Example: display charset = UTF8

=============

As for your putting "dos charset" in your smb.conf:

    dos charset (G)

           DOS SMB clients assume the server has the same charset as 
they do.
           This option specifies which charset Samba should talk to DOS
           clients.

           The default depends on which charsets you have installed. Samba
           tries to use charset 850 but falls back to ASCII in case it 
is not
           available. Run testparm(1) to check the default on your system.

           No default
---------------

    I.e. it's used for dos SMB clients.  Are you running DOS as well?
It just seemed odd to see it and I didn't know if there was any software 
that
was using it when most linux systems use UTF-8 today.  If samba, for some
obscure reason thought it was talking to a DOS client, it might try to 
encode for it, but
that client was really running UTF8, it might cause odd behavior.

    I don't hear of many people using DOS these days, so keeping around
outdated settings could exercise code paths not widely tested.  It would 
seem
reasonable to remove it, but having files suddenly "reappear after being 
deleted"?

That's pretty weird, but I know ZFS is good about keeping backups of 
things in
snapshots and good with deduplication -- so if it was acting up or 
misconfigured, it's
the only thing I could think of that might restore a backup of a file 
"out of thin air"...
(not that it should usually do that, but... of all the variables...).