Re: Vim on SMB share

2004-09-13 Thread Daren Russell
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2004-09-10 09:22, Daren Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the ideas.  The server side is Win2k (so not much I can do
there!), the BSD is using version 3 of the Samba client, so I'll try
downgrading it to version 2 and see how I go.
I guess it must also be to do with the way Vim edits files, as the basic
FBSD editor (ee) seems to manage.

Vim tries to create a file called .FILENAME.swp when you edit FILENAME.
The leading dot is probably what breaks the way vim works on Samba
shares.  You can always try to make vim write its swap files in another
location, i.e. in `/var/tmp' with this in your .vimrc:
set dir=/var/tmp
or you can disable swapfiles altogether with
set noswapfile
You can even play nice tricks like selectively disabling the swapfile
only for files that live in the well-known path of your Samba shares
with something similar to this in your .vimrc:
if !exists(samba_swapfile_hack)
  let samba_swapfile_hack = 1
  autocmd BufNewFile,BufRead /share/win2k/* set noswapfile
endif
Unless, of course, my guess is wrong and all this is nonsense :-)
Giorgos
I tried it on another FBsd box we have running 4.10 (the first box was 
running 5.something) and it worked fine.

Comparing them it appears to have been something to do with group 
permissions, although the user had full rwx access, they weren't in the 
group that the share was mounted with.  The 4.10 box had the directory 
the share was mounted on set to the users user/group by default.

I'm guessing SMBFS is a bit paranoid about user/group security (probably 
a good thing though!)

Daren
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Vim on SMB share

2004-09-10 Thread Daren Russell
Charles Ulrich wrote:
Daren Russell said:
Hi,
I know this is slightly OT, but it is still using FBSD!
I have a SMB share mounted, and can generally write to it.  I can copy
files to it, delete them, use 'ee' to edit and save them.
However, when using Vim, I can load and edit without warning, but if I
try to save it I get E212: Can't open file for writing
I can however create a new file on the share using Vim without problems,
try to edit it and get the same problem.
Whilst using Gentoo Linux, I did not have an issue with this (but that
box has destroyed itself, hence the move to a FBSD box)
Is this a known thing with Vim/SMB/FBSD?  Any ideas on something stupid
I have overlooked?
Thanks
Daren

Hi,
I recall running into this and other problems when I was using Samba 3.x on a
4.10 FreeBSD server and smbfs on a 5.2.1 FreeBSD client. In frustration, I
updated the server to 5.2.1 and downgraded Samba to 2.x and haven't had
problems since. I'd have a hard time believing that going to 5.2.1 on the
server side fixed the problem. Rather, I suspect that FreeBSD's smbfs has had
little attention lately and doesn't like the changes that have been made to
Samba since 2.x.
Alternatively, some of the recent patches to 5.2.1 may have had some positive
effect on the client's smbfs. Wish I could be more specific on all of this.
Charles Ulrich
Thanks for the ideas.  The server side is Win2k (so not much I can do 
there!), the BSD is using version 3 of the Samba client, so I'll try 
downgrading it to version 2 and see how I go.

I guess it must also be to do with the way Vim edits files, as the basic 
FBSD editor (ee) seems to manage.

Regards
Daren
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Vim on SMB share

2004-09-10 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On 2004-09-10 09:22, Daren Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Thanks for the ideas.  The server side is Win2k (so not much I can do
 there!), the BSD is using version 3 of the Samba client, so I'll try
 downgrading it to version 2 and see how I go.

 I guess it must also be to do with the way Vim edits files, as the basic
 FBSD editor (ee) seems to manage.

Vim tries to create a file called .FILENAME.swp when you edit FILENAME.
The leading dot is probably what breaks the way vim works on Samba
shares.  You can always try to make vim write its swap files in another
location, i.e. in `/var/tmp' with this in your .vimrc:

set dir=/var/tmp

or you can disable swapfiles altogether with

set noswapfile

You can even play nice tricks like selectively disabling the swapfile
only for files that live in the well-known path of your Samba shares
with something similar to this in your .vimrc:

if !exists(samba_swapfile_hack)
  let samba_swapfile_hack = 1
  autocmd BufNewFile,BufRead /share/win2k/* set noswapfile
endif

Unless, of course, my guess is wrong and all this is nonsense :-)

Giorgos

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Vim on SMB share

2004-09-09 Thread Charles Ulrich

Daren Russell said:
 Hi,

 I know this is slightly OT, but it is still using FBSD!

 I have a SMB share mounted, and can generally write to it.  I can copy
 files to it, delete them, use 'ee' to edit and save them.

 However, when using Vim, I can load and edit without warning, but if I
 try to save it I get E212: Can't open file for writing

 I can however create a new file on the share using Vim without problems,
 try to edit it and get the same problem.

 Whilst using Gentoo Linux, I did not have an issue with this (but that
 box has destroyed itself, hence the move to a FBSD box)

 Is this a known thing with Vim/SMB/FBSD?  Any ideas on something stupid
 I have overlooked?

 Thanks
 Daren

Hi,

I recall running into this and other problems when I was using Samba 3.x on a
4.10 FreeBSD server and smbfs on a 5.2.1 FreeBSD client. In frustration, I
updated the server to 5.2.1 and downgraded Samba to 2.x and haven't had
problems since. I'd have a hard time believing that going to 5.2.1 on the
server side fixed the problem. Rather, I suspect that FreeBSD's smbfs has had
little attention lately and doesn't like the changes that have been made to
Samba since 2.x.

Alternatively, some of the recent patches to 5.2.1 may have had some positive
effect on the client's smbfs. Wish I could be more specific on all of this.

Charles Ulrich
-- 
Charles Ulrich
System Administrator
Ideal Solution - http://www.idealso.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]