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

[Leander Schäfer]

FYI - this problem disappeared after I re-compiled samba from ports. I 
can not tell what the detailed cause was but I'm happy to be rid of the 
issue ;)


Am 11.05.14 00:17, schrieb Linda W:
> Leander Schäfer wrote:
>> Hi Linda
>>
>> no there is fortuntely no DOS in the net ;) ... there is only Windows 
>> XP, 7, 8, Server 2k3, 2k8, 2k12 and several MacOSx beginning from 
>> SnowLeopard up to Mavericks. I thought, since FreeBSD got tought to 
>> use UTF-8 and Windows only knows the castrated charset ISO8859-15 it 
>> is a requirement to convert between the both with this weired setting 
>> - but this may also a lack of knowledge of me. So can you confirm the 
>> translation between charset will be done even if the setting in 
>> smb4.conf only lokks like your suggestion?
> ----
> Windows NT (w2k/xp and above) uses, AT LEAST UCS-2 (64K chars) which 
> is good for
> up to about Unicode 2.0, Most applications use UTF-16 (UCS-2 with the 
> ability to 2-16-bit
> words for some characters (i.e. like UTF-8 uses 1-4 characters for 
> Unicode) that supports,
> enough extra 64K 'planes' to support all of unicode.  I regularly use 
> UTF-8 in filenames
> on linux and they display 'fine' on windows, though windows unicode 
> coverage isn't
> as good as linux's.  Windows doesn't have any easy ways to config 
> alternate font's to cover
> specific ranges -- it's _mostly_ into defining fonts / 16-bit plane, 
> which doesn't work
> well at all.  That's all an aside, though -- really.  You don't need 
> the cp1252 setting
> anymore.  Haven't since Win-ME/Win98 for the most part.
>
>>
>> display charset=UTF-8
> ...
>
>
> May 10 10:24:15 Storage-01 smbd[15098]:   Ignoring unknown parameter 
> "display charset"
> ----
> Must not be in samba4.  (Haven't upgraded yet as it doesn't seem to 
> offer any benefit, and
> may offer some performance hit, dunno -- at one point samba4 wasn't as 
> good a 'file server'
> as samba3 was.  I don't recall any announcement to the contrary, but 
> it's likely improved.
>
> Smbd is cpu bound on full speed reads/writes and is the limiting 
> factor in getting
> better throughput.... (sigh).
>
> Ok... one other thing that's odd on your problem.
>
> 1) is it only umlauts?  Which unicode letters are you using?
>
> i.e. when I tried my test, there are letter and a combining diarhesis 
> (umlaut),
> then there is the preferred form where the umlauts are already 
> combined with
> the vowels.
>
> I would try to get rid of the dos charset.  It's supposed to only be 
> for DOS
> clients.
>
> What recycle module are you using ??
>
> I wonder if the recycle module you are using is mistranslating 
> something and
> then can't find the file to move to the .recycle bin, thus it bounces 
> it back into
> the starting directory.
>
> Given everything else you've said, it's the only thing that makes any 
> sense.
>
> Sorry not more help...
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Am 10.05.14 05:37, schrieb Linda W:
>>> Leander Schäfer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have following settings in my smb4.conf
>>>> [ ... ]
>>>>   # Charset
>>>>   unix charset       = UTF-8
>>>>   dos charset        = cp1252
>>> ----
>>> BTW -- are you really using DOS?? Setting that for Windows NT might 
>>> cause problems.
>>>
>>> Only charset param I have in my smb.conf(3.6.22) is:
>>> display charset=UTF-8
>>>
>>>
>>
>