@Mason Kramer: Change "wide symlinks" to "wide links" and make sure it's
in the [global] section. It's working for me in 10.04:
uname -a
Linux lucid 2.6.32-27-generic #49-Ubuntu SMP Wed Dec 1 23:52:12 UTC 2010 i686
GNU/Linux
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ub
Oh, by the way, I did not have this issue in Ubuntu 9.x
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubu
I'm on Ubuntu 10.04, Lucid Lynx.
uname -a
Linux raja 2.6.32-25-generic #45-Ubuntu SMP Sat Oct 16 19:52:42 UTC 2010 x86_64
GNU/Linux
follow symlinks = yes
wide symlinks = yes
unix extensions = no
in /etc/samba/smb.conf
Symlinks are not getting followed on the server. My Mac can seem them
but c
@joel garbor: the option for symlinks out of the shared directory is called
"wide links = yes" (not wide SYMlinks)
on lucid i also had to install some other packages to make it work (like
samba-tools smbfs libpam-mount winbind) sorry i don't know which one does the
trick (i believe smbfs)
--
@prygme: sounds like your issue is different. Also the bug was about
CIFS mounts, which are affected by mount options (-o nounix) and not by
smb.conf parameters. Please open a separate bug if you want to report a
regression in Lucid.
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launch
I'd no problem with symlinks.Then I've updated to Lucid Lynx, and now I
discover this bug.
I've added the following lines to /etc/smb.conf :
follow symlinks = yes
wide symlinks = yes
unix extensions = no
No success. I can't change to symlinked libraries when I'm connecting
samba from windows xp
I've tried with nounix and nolinux (as proposed by the cifs devs) and
changed the bit in /proc and got symlinks all the time. I guess I was
using a different version than the server and there could be some
issues (I know rsync does a lot).
Unfortunately, I can't control the server, but I moved all
I was able to follow symlinks once I used the nounix option in the cifs
mount.
BUT it's still not clear to me what the "right" way to follow symlinks
is when unix extensions is turned on.
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug not
I have the same problem when 'unix extensions = yes' is set on the Samba
server side. Server and client are both Ubuntu 7.10 (Gutsy).
If the symlink itself is the share, it can be accessed from the client,
and it is followed correctly on the server. The symbol for the share in
the clients GUI is n
Hi, not at all, I don't have access to the server nor can ask the admins
to change this policy company wide. Thanks anyway!
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the b
@rengolin. I have used the other solution, on the Samba server-side:
'unix extensions = no'. This is working OK for me. I have not tried the
client-side solution like you have used, so I can not comment on that.
Perhaps this is any help for you.
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https:/
Hi,
I still have problems with this on Gutsy
$ uname -a
Linux sbornia 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Sun Oct 14 23:05:12 GMT 2007 i686
GNU/Linux
$ cat /proc/fs/cifs/LinuxExtensionsEnabled
0
$ sudo mount -t cifs -o
nounix,credentials=/home/renato/.smbcredentials,rw //cup/sp sp
And still see the syml
nfs behaves the same way, ie the clients sees symlink.
Steve provided three ways to fix your configuration.
Thus I'm marking this bug as Won't fix.
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Won't Fix
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1347
Note that smbfs symlink support may have problems. The cifs module has
replaced smbfs ("mount -t cifs //server/share /mnt" instead of "mount -t
smbfs //server/share /mnt"
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug notification because
Because misconfigured symlinks can be a security exposure, discussing
symlinks requires a little background:
If the client is Linux client, Samba server by default reports a symlink
as a symlink not as a directory. The Linux client can get information
on the symlink and follow it. Symlinks from
OK, it's nice to have that symlink info, but this is not good if that
particular folder is unreachable, see example:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/media/lin01-public/music/all$ cd mp3
bash: cd: mp3: No such file or directory
Even if I turn 'unix extensions = no' on de server (and assuming the
above problem
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 10:11:15PM -, markba wrote:
> Does it mean it's a feature that I can see symlink info through Samba?
Yes. But it seems that having a symlink pointing outside the shared
directory is pointless.
> Is the latest version of cifs not included in gutsy yet?
The latest versio
Can you translate your answer, please?
Does it mean it's a feature that I can see symlink info through Samba?
Is the latest version of cifs not included in gutsy yet?
I'm confused.
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug notificatio
This is a feature that falls under the CIFS Unix extensions. The latest
version of the cifs kernel modules implements proper support for these
extensions.
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
> Could you try to use the cifs module instead of smbfs ?
Same situation (unmounted smbfs, remounted with cifs)
> Which version does the ubuntu-server run ?
Dapper, smb 3.0.22
--
Mount with smbfs treats symlinks invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134716
You received this bug notification be
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.
Could you try to use the cifs module instead of smbfs ?
Which version does the ubuntu-server run ?
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
Status: New => Incomplete
--
Mount with sm
21 matches
Mail list logo
