[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: viewing/editing files at SMB locations

AFAIK, you can only do one level on NT, as opposed to say, Novell. If
you share d:\My Stuff\Really Cool\MP3\Deep Purple as
\\myserver\deeppurple you can do it, but you share d:\My Stuff as
\\myserver\mystuff that's where you have to attach. 

There's a command in SMB that will show you the available SMB shares on
a box, and those are the ones you'ld use in the smbmount command. Try
doing  smbclient -L -U <username> <password>. It should spit
out something like:

Domain=[DOMAINNAME] OS=[Windows 5.0] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager]

        Sharename      Type      Comment
        ---------      ----      -------
        drivers        Disk
        Installs       Disk
        8100_6         Printer   HP LaserJet 8100 DN PCL 6
        D$             Disk      Default share
So, I could connect to \\\drivers, but not
\\\drivers\laserjet\hp because SMB just sees it to the
'drivers' depth. However, if you shared (from the NT side) the
D:\drivers\laserjet\hp as 'hp', you could map directly there.

Make more sense?


>>> redhat maxxess co za 10/20/2003 5:24:10 AM >>>
Thanks again! I got the share to mount with the following 
command (The other one gave errors)

# /usr/bin/sudo /usr/bin/smbmount  //maxxsrv/maxxess /mnt/smbmnt -o
username=jason,password=jason -u 500 -g 501

I have enabled myself to use root passwords so that I don't have to
su first. 500 and 501 are my UID/GID numbers respectively.
What I find interesting is that even although I specifically state
that the mounted files/directories are to be owned by me, the files
still get owned by root, which means I can read the share but 
can't write to it as a normal user. Is there anyway I can force
the smb filesystem contents to be owned by me once mounted?

B.T.W. This share is a Windows server shared by all of the employees
here. I wanted to be more specific by mounting the share 
..maxxsrv/Staff Directories/Jason, but the smbmount command could
not find that share, and it does exist! I tried quoting "Staff
Directories" and that didn;t work either. I have been at this for over
hours now and still no joy. Any suggestions?

Thanks a stack !!

On Sat, 2003-10-18 at 02:47, Peter Larsen wrote:
> > Thanks for the info. I guess it's just me then ;)
> Well - we all start out knowing little to nothing ;)  Anyway, I guess
if you
> expected everything to look like it does in windows, I can see why
you might
> get a little confused.
> > I am not familiar with SMB or Samba at all. Could you possibly
> > give me the guidelines for setting up an smbmount? I am not sure
> > how the whole process works ...
> Easiest way is: man smbmount
> If you already know how to use a windows share without using smbmount
> using smbclient) then it's not much of a difference. Actually, you
> mount using "mount" instead of smbmount, but smbmount makes it easy
to do
> non-root mounts of shares. But it doesn't prevent you from using
> to specify permanent smb mount points.
> If you don't use PDC functionality, and just have public accessible
> smbmount is straight forward: smbmount //server/share /mnt/point.
> However, if you need to specify usernames etc. you solve that either
> smbusers or using the -o parameters (which you'll find in the man
> Best Regards
>   Peter Larsen
> > On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 20:32, Peter Larsen wrote:
> > > > It seems as though the various programs I use to view/edit
> > > > files, such as Gedit or Vi, are not able to view or access
> > > > at SMB locations. Can anyone recommend a good editor that can
> > > > both view and edit text files and RTF files at SMB locations?
> > >
> > > Hmmm - I access several windows networks from several of my linux
> and
> > > never saw that problem?  What I do is smbmount the shares I need,
> from
> > > then on, I never think of the data/files being on a windows
> linux
> > > or anything else. It's just a cd away, and all my programs sees
> files as
> > > "usual".
> > >
> > > Only windows (to my knowledge) has the idea of you needing to
> the
> > > physical aspect of a resource location. I like the way Unix has
> this
> > > from the get-go - you don't care if your data is on one huge
> several
> > > small ones, networked, memory based etc. - they are all part of
the same
> > > logical structure. It's up to the drivers to find out what to do
- not
> the
> > > application developer/user.
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > >   Peter Larsen

Psyche-list mailing list
Psyche-list redhat com 

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]