My feeling is that yes it has something to do with the resource fork files since you
are right, thats what is different when copying files through the Finder vs. the
terminal. But I've already barked up that tree as you put it. There was a guy in the
newsgroups who was intentionally vetoing
,
codepages, all that bundle of fun, I could see that perhaps being a problem, I'm going
to dig into that.
Thanks,
Tom
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:29:58 -0600
Philip Edelbrock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: [Samba] RH 9, Samba 2.2.8 and Mac OS X Clients
What happens w/ 3.0? You get permission
Is this related to handling of files with resource forks?
Manipulating files in Terminal, IIRC, ignores the resource fork -- but Finder
actions (like dragging a folder to upload it) include those resources.
You might try barking up this tree. :7) (Sorry I can't make any concrete
That could be true. If you veto 'dot' files in smb.conf, then you would
get strange permission errors from OS-X clients. OS-X wants to put
._filename files (AppleDouble versions of the resource forks) and
.DS_Store files (containing some file metadata like Finder comments) on
the server.
If
Welcome to the club. Yes, I experience that exact same issue with Mac OS
10.2.x and like you was waiting for 10.3 which I got to try for the first
time today. Like you it didn't fix anything. Its crazy. As you say
everything works fine if you drop to a shell prompt you can do all the cp
-r,
Welcome to the club. Yes, I experience that exact same issue with Mac OS
10.2.x and like you was waiting for 10.3 which I got to try for the first
time today. Like you it didn't fix anything. Its crazy. As you say
everything works fine if you drop to a shell prompt you can do all the cp
-r,
Been having very similar problems on RedHad-7.3 with Samba 2.2.7-3.7.3.
Currently users can create folders, but they can't copy files. An entry
is created for the file on the server, but no data ever gets transfered.
I've found that if you manipulate the files from the Terminal there is
no