Larry Brown wrote:
>
> The application is called CenterPiece. It is a financial planning
> application. Its server configuration allows you to sellect where to
> find the db files. The files are in the same place and the CenterPiece
> version did not change. This is XP Pro. Since the choice was between
> Home and Pro...
Yeah, you chose well, if you had to choose between those two.
>
> I would imagine that I have the password part set correctly as I am able
> to browse to the share and create/delete files there from windows
> explorer. There is no restrictions on samba based on pc (also evident
> that is not the cause based on the success listed above.
Would you mind giving me a look at your smb.conf file? Either on the list or
directly to me, if you like. In fact, if anyone has any problems with this
discussion of what seems to be a Windows problem occurring on the Linux list, we
might move the entire discussion off-list.
> Thanks for helping address this.
No problem. Ah aimz ta pleeze. I only hope my rambling on might turn out to be
of some use, when all is said and done.
I was watching the ethereal results
> and could see (at one point) an NBNS query looking for the USERNAME.
> Originally on the win2k box that has now been renamed, it was USERNAME.
> I named the XP box USERNAME and created the user which was USERNAME. XP
> balked at this saying I couldn't have the same username as that of the
> machine and so I changed the computer's name so I didn't have to go
> through changing credentials on the server. So when I saw the query for
> USERNAME I figured XP was sending the login credentials and the server
> was responding to it. So I changed the name of the XP box back to
> USERNAME after USERNAME was already being used as the login on that box
> and it didn't complain. (NICE) Now when I run the application I don't
> get squat on the network.
It's generally good practice to use different words for usernames and hostnames,
for a number of reasons -- one of them being avoiding conflicts with networking
applications that might not be able to handle the overlap.
You probably already said something about this, in which case I just forgot,
but: Are you mapping a network drive from WinXP, or just using the //host/share
name to access the share? If you can successfully map the drive, I'd recommend
doing so and pointing your application at the mapped network drive rather than
at the share via hostname. It's sort of a tradeoff: One one hand, Windows
loses track of mapped network drives and sometimes can't find them again,
whereas using the hostname directly will generally allow it to find the share
again. On the other hand, Windows is a crotchety old b**ch that just refuses
sometimes to find shares for automated activity unless they're mapped as network
drives. Since losing track of the drive can ultimately be fixed by rebooting
the computer, generally, and Windows needs to be rebooted occasionally to clear
memory leaks and the like, it seems that mapping a network drive is the lesser evil.
>
> I do have some upgrades to be done on the server. However, my next test
> will be to place the shares on a 2k box and see if it successfully
> connects. Based on the Ethereal results, it should not be successful.
> The only way it could be is if there is some preliminary contact that
> server software makes during boot that if unsuccessful, it simply will
> not try again during the session.
Let me know how that comes out. In the meantime, I'll poke around through my
notes and references and see if anything jumps out at me as a possible cause of
your particular problem.
>
> IF THEY WOULD JUST STICK TO A SOLID OS....
Heh heh. They gave up on DOS a long time ago. 3.11 is the last Windows that
handled anything like a steady networking load (for its time) without constant
issues.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 13:21:20 EDT