smb not mounting share for specific user (SOLVED)

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 22:38 +0000, redhatdude at bellsouth.net wrote:
> 
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com>
> >
> > On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 20:42 +0000, redhatdude at bellsouth.net wrote:
> > > 
> > > -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > > From: Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com>
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 19:34 +0000, redhatdude at bellsouth.net wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > > > > From: redhatdude at bellsouth.net
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > I added a user with useradd. Then added the user to smb with smbpasswd -a. 
> > > > Then 
> > > > > > restarted smb.
> > > > Now, I can mount the samba share using my user name. However, when I try 
> > to 
> > > > > mount the share with the newly created user, even though I log in and smb 
> > > > > > accepts the user and password, it gives me the following error:
> > > > > > The volume "Storage" could not be mounted
> > > > > > Anybody knows what the issue is here?
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > EJ
> > > > > > 
> > > > > I forgot to add the user to the valid user of the share.
> > > > ----
> > > > 1. it is more useful to use 'groups' instead of users...
> > > > 
> > > > You can set the group ownership of the share and folders inside...
> > > >    i.e. image /home/samba/files is a file share for samba users
> > > >    chgrp samba_users /home/samba/files -R
> > > >    chmod g+w,g+w /home/samba/files -R
> > > >    add @samba_users to share (valid users = @samba_users)
> > > > 
> > > > now all files and folders are owned by 'samba_users' group and all new
> > > > files and folders will likewise be owned by 'samba_users' group
> > > > 
> > > > 2. You don't need to restart samba after changes to smb.conf as the
> > > > configuration file is reloaded automatically every minute (I think), but
> > > > if it makes you feel better to restart samba service...by all means.
> > > > 
> > > > Craig
> > > 
> > > Maybe a dumb question. Do I need to create a new group in the system with 
> > groupadd samba_users?
> > > Thanks a lot.
> > ----
> > not a dumb question at all but a clear indication that you haven't found
> > samba documentation that is worth following so let me first point out...
> > 
> > http://samba.org/samba/docs/
> > 
> > which I would unhesitatingly declare the best open source documentation
> > available
> > see the 'Samba 3 HowTo' and 'Samba by Example'
> > 
> > The issue is that Windows has a lot of pre-conceived notions of users,
> > groups, ID's and samba tries to accommodate them in ways that seem
> > confusing to UNIX/Linux users but are pretty obvious to those familiar
> > with Windows Networking concepts.
> > 
> > The idea is that you 'map' samba groups to Unix groups.
> > 
> > The documentation on the subject begins here...
> > http://samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/groupmapping.html#id38254
> > 8
> > 
> > so if all the users were part of the Linux group 'users', you could
> > conceivably map the 'Samba Domain Group' called "Domain Users" to the
> > posix group 'users'
> > 
> > net groupmap list
> > 
> > will print a list of current samba groups (no doubt 'unassigned')
> > 
> > Craig
> 
> You're right. I should've gone to samba.org in the first place. I just followed a few HOWTOs I googled.
> Do I need to use groups and do the mapping if most of our users are on macs and we're only using samba trying to accomodate two Windows users? The boss and a sales person want access to design files.
> Thanks,
----
No - you can use whatever you want to use...you can simply have those 2
users and ignore the groups aspect but it looks more complicated than it
really is.

If the Mac's are connecting via NFS, you could conceivably have the
Windows users connect via NFS (Microsoft offers SFU - Services For Unix)
or Cygwin.

I think more than anything, you have to always consider symmetry of the
various connections and thus using the same users/groups with Windows
networking and NFS makes a lot of sense. There is an issue that if a
file is in use via NFS, samba users wouldn't likely recognize that and
vice-versa.

Craig