On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:53 -0800, Scott Silva wrote:
> on 3-6-2009 1:46 AM Noob Centos Admin spake the following:
> > I was back onsite and trying it again, in vain. Copied the conf from
> > another site's working setup and dumped directly, recreated with the
> > same names and all. No go.
> >
>
on 3-6-2009 1:46 AM Noob Centos Admin spake the following:
> I was back onsite and trying it again, in vain. Copied the conf from
> another site's working setup and dumped directly, recreated with the
> same names and all. No go.
>
> So again removed and install samba again, made a blank conf file
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> I was back onsite and trying it again, in vain. Copied the conf from
> another site's working setup and dumped directly, recreated with the
> same names and all. No go.
>
> So again removed and install samba again, made a blank conf file, fire
> up SWAT and did the most
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 17:46 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> I was back onsite and trying it again, in vain. Copied the conf from
> another site's working setup and dumped directly, recreated with the
> same names and all. No go.
>
> So again removed and install samba again, made a blank conf fil
I was back onsite and trying it again, in vain. Copied the conf from
another site's working setup and dumped directly, recreated with the
same names and all. No go.
So again removed and install samba again, made a blank conf file, fire
up SWAT and did the most basic config.
Even chmod 777 the dir
on 3-5-2009 12:03 PM Noob Centos Admin spake the following:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Scott Silva
> wrote:
>
>> Learn to use a file editor and edit the configs yourself. That is the only
>> way
>> to have the best control.
>
> That's generally how I try to do things, except sometimes h
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Scott Silva wrote:
> Learn to use a file editor and edit the configs yourself. That is the only way
> to have the best control.
That's generally how I try to do things, except sometimes hand
"written" doesn't work the way I expect it to. Then I'd like to have a
GU
on 2-23-2009 10:53 AM Noob Centos Admin spake the following:
> Everytime I have to setup samba to handle Windows users, sometime
> inadvertently goes wrong or doesn't work the way I expected, or takes
> forever to setup, especially when there are many users and various
> policies. So far, the easie
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 02:44 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> > you aren't too concerned about security, you can change this to
> > 'security = share' and then you can browse before authenticating, and
> > also have the option to authenticate as different users when connecting
> > to different sha
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
>
>> But, if you want to do it the hard way, you probably have an
>
> Unfortunately I do want to do it the hard way. While the SME server
> would make things really easy, the lesson I learnt in the past with
> easy thing is that, once something break, I will really have n
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 02:44 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> > But, if you want to do it the hard way, you probably have an
>
> Unfortunately I do want to do it the hard way. While the SME server
> would make things really easy, the lesso
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> But, if you want to do it the hard way, you probably have an
Unfortunately I do want to do it the hard way. While the SME server
would make things really easy, the lesson I learnt in the past with
easy thing is that, once something break, I w
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> I'm seriously befuddled by Samba now.
>
> I followed the good advice given and got the previous server set up nicely.
>
> I did the same thing on another one and it refuses to work.
>
> 1. useradd some users
> 2. gpasswd -a them to a "staff" group nd smbpasswd -a them
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 8:12 PM, JohnS wrote:
> How about chown -R root:staff /directory_name ???
> chmod -R 777 /directory_name ???
The directory was chown -R to staff:staff and chmod -R to 770
I'll give a try on 777 on Monday (US Sunday). They are currently using
an older Win2
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 17:59 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> I'm seriously befuddled by Samba now.
>
> I followed the good advice given and got the previous server set up nicely.
>
> I did the same thing on another one and it refuses to work.
>
> 1. useradd some users
> 2. gpasswd -a them to a
From: Noob Centos Admin
> 8. tail -f samba logs but nothing happens, it's like samba never see
> the incoming request. Note that it doesn't log anything with smbclient
> -L either.
Did you try to raise the log level (log level = 3)?
> I'm almost certain now that samba coder snuck in a devious r
I'm seriously befuddled by Samba now.
I followed the good advice given and got the previous server set up nicely.
I did the same thing on another one and it refuses to work.
1. useradd some users
2. gpasswd -a them to a "staff" group nd smbpasswd -a them
3. chmod g+s the staff directory
4. teste
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> That makes it somewhat harder to use multiple machines since you end up
>> having to create and maintain passwords on each.
>
> True, but the usual work behaviour here means that seldom happen. Even
> if they do ne
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> That makes it somewhat harder to use multiple machines since you end up
> having to create and maintain passwords on each.
True, but the usual work behaviour here means that seldom happen. Even
if they do need to work on somebody else's machi
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Is there a windows domain or AD in this picture somewhere?
>
> Not at all for all the usual Windows network migrations I've been
> setting up. Typically small offices with less than 20 people so they
> simply used
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Is there a windows domain or AD in this picture somewhere?
Not at all for all the usual Windows network migrations I've been
setting up. Typically small offices with less than 20 people so they
simply used workgroups without domains.
> If yo
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
>
>
> probably not the answer you want to hear but...
> swat is supposed to be the tool for simple administration.
>
>
> I was afraid of that. By the time I gave up and completed the task
> manually, I was thinking maybe it might be easier to write my own scrip
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Ned Slider wrote:
> The samba configuration tool (system-config-samba) is finally fixed in
> 5.3 (due out soon) and will now correctly show added samba users :-)
>
Honestly, I'm so glad to see this! Although I won't likely benefit from it
until the next server i
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Craig White wrote:
>
> probably not the answer you want to hear but...
> swat is supposed to be the tool for simple administration.
I was afraid of that. By the time I gave up and completed the task manually,
I was thinking maybe it might be easier to write my o
Noob Centos Admin wrote:
>
> So far I've tried the following which all don't quite work.
>
> 1. CentOS's samba configuration tool
> - added users never show up on the share configuration so the only shares it
> could create was for public access.
>
The samba configuration tool (system-config-sa
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 02:53 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
> Everytime I have to setup samba to handle Windows users, sometime
> inadvertently goes wrong or doesn't work the way I expected, or takes
> forever to setup, especially when there are many users and various
> policies. So far, the easies
Everytime I have to setup samba to handle Windows users, sometime
inadvertently goes wrong or doesn't work the way I expected, or takes
forever to setup, especially when there are many users and various policies.
So far, the easiest, sureest and quickest method appears to be install
WindowsXP into
27 matches
Mail list logo
