Problem with smb shares.

[Maxim Eremeev]

Hello akonstam,

Wednesday, February 9, 2005, 3:50:19 PM, you wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 02:12:12AM -0600, David Hoffman wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:23:44 +0100, Roger Grosswiler <roger at gwch.net> wrote:
>> > akonstam at trinity.edu schrieb:
>> > >
>> > > Well here is the deal. The managers of the system put users, faculty,
>> > > etc. in different subdirectories. When I use the first smbmount I
>> > > mount not the directory of csldap1 but the directory of all the
>> > > home directories of users of the system. I might be able to live with
>> > > that but it is annoying. Not to make a value judgement but MAC OS X
>> > > allows you to mount  using the share: //trinity-tigers/users/csldap1
>> > > to mount only the home directory of csldap1.
>> > i see 2 problems here:
>> > a) we are not using mac os x
>> > b) i can deal with userdirectories without mounting the main-share for
>> > all, if i put in my /etc/smb.conf the following for my user-shares:
>> > 
>> > [homes]
>> >    comment = Home Directories
>> >    path = /users/%U
>> >    guest ok = no
>> >    browseable = yes
>> >    writable = yes
>> >    create mask = 775
>> > 
>> > i have all my userdirs in a directory called users. I share all the
>> > homes with the %U afterwards, so if i user loggs in, the %U gets
>> > replaced by its user name - voil?, this works. Putting browseable=no
>> > hides the /users-share too. Still not perfect (would like to load a
>> > server-side-login-batch on linux too..) but even more elegant than
>> > having all shares seen by everybody.
>> > 
>> > HTH
>> > Roger
>> > 
>> > 
>> 
>> Roger, I think you have it backwards. He is not trying to share user
>> directories on his FC3 machine. He is trying to mount shares on a
>> Windows machine to his FC3 machine.
>> 
>> So the user shares are on the windows machine and he wants to connect
>> to the windows shares with Fedora.
>> 
>> It's not a question of setting up Samba, as that would provide shares
>> from Fedora TO windows.
>> 
> You are absolutely correct in your analysis of what I want to do. So
> can it be done?

> I recently received a clarification from out Windows people that the
> share is really //trinity-tigers/users so technically smbmount is
> doing what it is advertised to do but Windows 2000 and XP allow you to
> mount one level below the share. I am getting the feeling that
> smbmount will not.
> -- 

Smbmount will not, AFAIK. However what would prevent you from mounting
this share to some directory, say /mnt/trinity_users and then manage
subdirectories giving the each user access to the proper one and
placing symlinks into their home folders?
Regards,
Maxim.