Actually between two linux machines the easiest filesharing (and by
far most resource efficient) is NFS for filesharing and NIS for
authentication (the two things that samba can do for windows machines.
However.., I do understand what you mean about how you ask how to do
something, and what you get back is a "you shouldn't do that, you
should do xyz", and they don't mention anything about how to do what
you asked, which can be most annoying. So..., now for the how:
For each account that will access the machine with samba, you need
that account to be listed in two places, /etc/passwd (and in most
cases /etc/shadow, but that would be handled by adduser or useradd),
and the samba password file (usually /etc/smbpasswd, but could also be
passdb.tdb (locations of that tdbsam formatted file vary, you can tell
if it's smbpasswd or tdbsam by looking in your smb.conf file).
note: If you want samba to be a pdc I strongly recommend the tdbsam
format, even though it's binary the system seems to handle it much
better (don't know if samba -3 will even work as a pdc with the text
formatted one).
As you don't have the accounts you mentioned in the password files
that would be your first issue.
You also need to list which shares you want to be accessible to the
other computers in your smb.conf file. Probably the best way to do
this (especially if you have a lot of shares, or want special
permissions/options) is with swat (samba web administration tool).
You usually have to go into either inetd.conf or (more likely with a
current distro), xinetd, there's both a single file, and a directory
of files which you'll have to poke around in to enable. If you want
to edit manually, usually your distro does provide a smb.conf file
that you can edit to get some basic features (I personally save a copy
of the distro's version elsewhere in case I mess up). Or you can look
at http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/SMB-HOWTO-6.html (though it's 6 years
old).
Sorry I can't provide any more, it's been a decade or two since I've
last used suse (I've mostly used redhat and debian these days).
On 2/14/06, SOTL <sotl155360@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 03:34 pm, Craig Zeigler wrote:
> > SOTL wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > I am trying to make a Samba between two SuSE 10.0 boxes.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I still get an error message:
> > >
> > > Can not find slp:/ in the tree Internal Error
> > >
> > > It believe that the source of the problem may be my smppasswd file are
> > > incorrect.
> > >
> > > I would appreciate suggestion as to the validity of the following files:
> > >
> > > ____
> > > SERVER smppasswd
> > > # This file is the authentication source for Samba if 'passdb backend' is
> > > set # to 'smbpasswd' and 'encrypt passwords' is 'Yes' in the [global]
> > > section of # /etc/samba/smb.conf
> > > #
> > > # See section 'passdb backend' and 'encrypt passwords' in the manual page
> > > of # smb.conf for more information.
> > > root:0:7AFFBB23C42095FE1841B9F02226DD3D:CDA6A2FA4891C12AD967B90778206005:
> > > [U ]:LCT-43EED964:
> > > _____
> > > CLIENT smbpasswd
> > > # This file is the authentication source for Samba if 'passdb backend' is
> > > set # to 'smbpasswd' and 'encrypt passwords' is 'Yes' in the [global]
> > > section of # /etc/samba/smb.conf
> > > #
> > > # See section 'passdb backend' and 'encrypt passwords' in the manual page
> > > of # smb.conf for more information.
> > > _____
> > >
> > > The user name for the CLIENT is "trunk" with password "Clienttestpw"
> > > The user name for the SERVER is "office" with password "Servertestpw"
> > > _____
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > SOTL
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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.
> >
> > Why would you bother using Samba between Linux boxen when something like
> > rsync, scp, or NFS would be a much better solution.
>
> Because that is the easiest way to set up any control or computer system
> system be it Linux or Microsoft or what ever.
>
> If possible first you take a computer from a system that is known to function
> for its given usage correctly.
>
> Then you add the first component to it that is unknown and attempt to make
> that component work with the component that you know to operate correct.
>
> Then you proceed on and add an additional component making it work too until
> you get the system to work.
>
> It is always much harder to take two components neither of which you know to
> work correct with another and make them work together.
>
> If you have to do this, two components which you do not know to function
> correctly in a system, then it is best to use two components that are
> identical from the same manufacture that eliminates the issue both saying it
> is not our fault it is the other guy's fault.
>
> The worst thing one can possible attempt is to take two components which may
> or may not work correctly in a system from two different vendors and attempt
> to marry their operation together while at the same time having as zero
> experience in making such marriage one at that point is guaranteed a hard
> time.
>
> What I have done is attempt to eliminate as much of this as possible by
> putting two identical systems in two computers and start attempting to marry
> their operations.
>
> Also you may consider neither computer being used for this is setup for MS
> Windows simply because I have NO MS Windows system to install on either. This
> is of course by choice as I am not going to pay for an inferior system.
>
> You will note in all the above including my original post that there was
> anything about what I am attempting to do. The only question that I ask was a
> pure technical question and help with a basic configuration file. And, if I
> recall correctly this is what started the last rank involving myself and
> others on this list so lets just keep it this time to the simple original
> technical question of are the two Samba files correct or not. I have no
> desires to get into a rank about the relative merits of connecting a MS box
> to a Linux box with NFS or Samba. Yes a MS box can be connected to a Linux
> box using NFS but in order to do so one must add files and programs to the MS
> box. That adding files to the MS boxes in my office is not going to fly with
> Management. So the solutions you are henting at above are not solutions but
> political traps both on and off this list.
>
> Sorry for the rank and long explanation but I am still kinda of pissed about
> the last time I ask technical question and got into a war over it.
>
> SOTL
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 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 - 18:28:26 EDT