[Samba] Solution for: "Samba server does not show up in Windows Network Places"

[Rowland Penny]

On 04/11/14 18:49, Bo Kersey wrote:
> I was basing this on the TODO item in the comment:
>
> -               /* TODO: when we have a merged set of defaults for
> -                * loadparm, we could possibly check if the internal
> -                * nbt server is in the list, and allow a startup if disabled */
>
> So, if I turn off nbt server (if this TODO had been completed) I could run nmbd.  I don't know how to check that nbt is disabled, so I just did this the dangerous way.
> The item in the comment seems to imply that as long as nbt is not running that it is ok to run nmbd.  Does that make sense?
>

Yes, but 'nbt' is part of the samba daemon and just turning it off is 
probably not enough, most likely there will be internal connections 
between 'nbt' and the samba daemon, these connections will not be there 
between the nmbd and the samba daemons, also, if it was that easy, they 
would have done it that way in the first place. Samba 4.2 will have the 
internal 'winbind' part of the samba daemon turned off in favour of the 
separate 'winbindd' daemon. This appears to have taken a lot of work and 
it still has problems, so I would think that a similar amount of work 
will have to be done to get 'nmbd' to work correctly with samba4.

This is likely to be low down the list of priorities, as it is not 
strictly necessary.

Rowland


Rowland

>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Rowland Penny" <rowlandpenny at googlemail.com>
>> To: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2014 12:40:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Samba] Solution for: "Samba server does not show up in Windows Network Places"
>>
>> On 04/11/14 18:13, Bo Kersey wrote:
>>> I may have a solution to this problem but would like any advice on the
>>> downside of doing this.  Essentially, I remove role check in nmbd.c as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>> --- samba-4.1.13.orig/source3/nmbd/nmbd.c
>>> +++ samba-4.1.13/source3/nmbd/nmbd.c
>>> @@ -914,16 +914,6 @@ static bool open_sockets(bool isdaemon,
>>>    
>>>    	reopen_logs();
>>>    
>>> -	if (lp_server_role() == ROLE_ACTIVE_DIRECTORY_DC
>>> -	    && !lp_parm_bool(-1, "server role check", "inhibit", false)) {
>>> -		/* TODO: when we have a merged set of defaults for
>>> -		 * loadparm, we could possibly check if the internal
>>> -		 * nbt server is in the list, and allow a startup if disabled */
>>> -		DEBUG(0, ("server role = 'active directory domain controller' not
>>> compatible with running nmbd standalone. \n"));
>>> -		DEBUGADD(0, ("You should start 'samba' instead, and it will control
>>> starting the internal nbt server\n"));
>>> -		exit(1);
>>> -	}
>>> -
>>>    	msg = messaging_init(NULL, server_event_context());
>>>    	if (msg == NULL) {
>>>    		return 1;
>>>
>>> Then recompile.
>>> I turn off nbt for the samba4 daemon in /etc/smb.conf
>>>
>>> Then I run nmbd instead of samba4's netbios server.  The result is that the
>>> samba server shows up in Windows Network Places and everything else seems
>>> to be working fine.
>>>
>>> Can anyone tell me why I would not want to do this?  Is there some downside
>>> that I'm not seeing?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Bo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> This has been gone through before, why do you think this is there (and
>> you have turned off):
>>
>> DEBUG(0, ("server role = 'active directory domain controller' not
>> compatible with running nmbd standalone. \n"));
>>
>> It was explained, by Andrew Bartlett, just why it is a **bad* *idea to
>> run the nmbd daemon with the samba daemon and very shortly afterwards
>> the lines, you have removed, were added.
>>
>> Think about it, why would the samba devs add something to samba if it
>> was not actually required.
>>
>> Rowland
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>