-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03 Feb 2003 20:57:52 -0500, Ashley Kitson wrote:
> > This is not true for Red Hat's samba-swat packages. There the server > > line points to /usr/sbin/swat. Whatever you did, you damaged the > > xinetd config files in several places. > > Whatever I did, was done under strict direction from the install > directions from the RH8 install guide and following that, the > directions whilst installing. Up to the point that I let the update > program do its own thing and put V2.2.7 of samba on board. The > directory structure that was built was built by the RH install > program, not me. You wrote: : : It turned out that the server= line in the /etc/xinetd.d/swat : file is pointing to something that doesn't exist (it reads : server=/etc/xinetd/swat i.e. itself). Which is not true for Red Hat's samba-swat package(s). > I have copies of the xinetd config files (I'm not > that green) and they are as per original apart from the 3 lines that > you originally queried (which have been removed.) There is a difference between the xinetd config file /etc/xinetd.conf and xinetd service-specific include files in /etc/xinet.d. Not only did you add three wrong lines to xinetd's config, you also edited the service include files manually, introducing mistakes. Running "chkconfig swat on" would have been enough after installation to turn SWAT on. It would give an error if samba-swat were not installed. And to be safe, users including me suggested to restart xinetd (service xinetd restart, for instance). A default installation of Red Hat Linux has xinetd enabled and chkconfig triggers xinetd reconfiguration. > Please note that > these were entered after reference to the various documentation files > that I found both on the distribution and the Samba site itself. Doesn't explain where a server=/etc/xinetd/swat line comes from. Apart from that, external documentation can contain bugs or can be out-of-date (like a good number of HOWTOs). Red Hat's guides suggest chkconfig/service and the graphical service config tools. > > Yes, because it is an optional package. > > Doh, I should have known that, really? Nowhere in the install docs or > under installation does it mention that it is an option. Trust me, > I've tried to do this several times and understand the difference > between core and optional when it comes to RPM. It's simply not > listed as an option. We have gone over this ground. Running up2date > samba-swat does not work. But sure it does. If samba-swat is not installed, it would fetch and install it including all dependencies. If samba-swat is installed, it would either update to a newer version (if available) or say that no newer version can be found. > The system does not recognise that I have > 2.2.5 installed and never has. Please show what it looks like on the command-line. $ rpm -qa 'samba*' $ up2date --nox samba-swat > In fact running it on the command line > gives no response whatsoever (the session that underlies X reports > that Samba 2.3.5 has not been found again, Samba 2.2.5 is running, I > know, I can see it from my win95 machines). Don't forget your inetd-style entries in xinetd.conf. Let me quote: : : netbios-ssn stream tcp nowait root /usr/local/samba/bin/smbd smbd : netbios-ns dgram udp wait root /usr/local/samba/bin/nmbd nmbd : swat stream tcp nowait.400 root /etc/xinetd.d/swat swat Which indicates you might have another version of Samba in /usr/local/samba. > > Don't mix in packages like that. The dependency chain of other > > vendor's packages often is not compatible with Red Hat. For > > instance, while Red Hat provides "samba", "samba-common" and > > "samba-swat", the samba-2.2.7a-1 rpm you refer to is a single > > package. > > You miss the point. here is a timeline: > > 1/ RH6.2 Loaded sometime back > 2/ Machine nuked > 3/ RH 8.0 loaded including Samba > 4/ RH autoupdate updates Samba to 2.2.7 > 5/ I get around to using it, configure Samba to run manually and think > this is a chore, what about using Swat. Swat don't run. > 6/ xinetd manually configured for swat, no joy Point 6 was a mistake. Only configure what you have installed. "chkconfig swat on" would have told you. Btw, I wouldn't start trying to configure swat before I examined the samba packages on whether swat is included. Red Hat's docs on Samba don't mention Samba SWAT, probably because redhat-config-samba was in planning already. So if you learn about SWAT somewhere else, at least you could browse your CDs on what additional packages are provided. > 7/ list conversations > 8/ try to install swat from disk 3. no joy it is expecting samba 2.2.5 As mentioned, "up2date samba-swat" would have done it. Anyway, I think you should end this thread here unless you have further questions about Samba, Samba packages or getting SWAT up and running. [rest snipped] - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+PbNy0iMVcrivHFQRAq+4AJ9obzzkKtfzzHreX/nMnAns3g2Q7wCeJH8K kDsAFqZ/H2wvjAYpO8/Mlng= =uD/f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
