[csw-users] Samba 3.2.0 and 3.0.31 ?
Dennis Clarke
blastwave at gmail.com
Thu Jul 24 07:03:05 CEST 2008
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Janky Jay, III <jankyj at unfs.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello, All.
>
> As non-active as I am on this list (Mainly due to me still getting as
> much experience with Blastwave before I completely dive in), I have to
> agree with Dennis 100% on this. There's no reason to state what I agree
> upon as Dennis has explained his stand on this to the Nth degree.
Sorry .. I do that. I can be a tad verbose .. but I'd rather speak my mind.
> While
> I'm a big fan of minimalism, the fact that disk space and other system
> resources that have so many times in the past been referred to as
> "bloat" doesn't come in to play _NEAR_ as much as it used to.
My concern is that we may embrace the pitfalls of laziness or slip
shod workmanship in exchange for the quick and easy path. Essentially,
am I doing the right thing? My gut is telling me that samba should be
a complete package because that is the way the Samba project releases
it. GCC is different in that you can get bits and pieces and you can
specify that you only want certain languages but not with Samba.
> Coming from a BSD background, I'm used to many, _MANY_ applications
> diced into separate applications which are installed based upon
> dependencies and/or whatever the admin decides to install. This is great
> in the idea that you can choose and be as minimalistic as possible.
> However, these are only packed with options because they are source
> builds being compiled then. In other words, if you want fancy, detailed,
> minimalistic installs, build from source. Otherwise, a package should
> house a complete application...
Also, I'd rather provide a solution than not. Certainly one that is so
popular and needed and hard to get up to date for Solaris.
So I have these sitting on my hard drive and maybe that should just be
dropped somewhere on a webpage :
samba-3.2.0,REV=2008.07.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg
samba-3.2.0,REV=2008.07.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg
samba-3.0.31,REV=2008.07.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg
samba-3.0.31,REV=2008.07.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg
In both cases I have set all paths for data/config to be under
/etc/opt or /var thus :
$ /opt/csw/sbin/smbd -b
Build environment:
Built by: dclarke at titan
Built on: Sat Jul 12 14:32:01 EDT 2008
Built using: cc
Build host: SunOS titan 5.8 Generic_117351-54 i86pc i386 i86pc
SRCDIR:
/export/nfs/samba/build/samba-3.0.31-build/../samba-3.0.31/source
BUILDDIR: /export/nfs/samba/build/samba-3.0.31-build
Paths:
SBINDIR: /opt/csw/sbin
BINDIR: /opt/csw/bin
SWATDIR: /opt/csw/share/samba/swat
CONFIGFILE: /etc/opt/csw/samba/smb.conf
LOGFILEBASE: /var/opt/csw/samba/state
LMHOSTSFILE: /etc/opt/csw/samba/lmhosts
LIBDIR: /opt/csw/lib
SHLIBEXT: so
LOCKDIR: /var/opt/csw/samba/lock
PIDDIR: /var/opt/csw/samba
SMB_PASSWD_FILE: /etc/opt/csw/samba/private/smbpasswd
PRIVATE_DIR: /etc/opt/csw/samba/private
etc etc
# /opt/csw/bin/smbstatus
Samba version 3.0.31
PID Username Group Machine
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Service pid machine Connected at
-------------------------------------------------------
No locked files
# /opt/csw/bin/pdbedit -w -L
smbtest:12345:D85774CF671A9947AAD3B435B51404EE:BAAC3929FABC9E6DCD32421BA94A84D4:[U]:LCT-48793673:
# /opt/csw/bin/smbclient -L VESTA
Password:
Anonymous login successful
Domain=[CSWSAMBA] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.2.0]
Sharename Type Comment
--------- ---- -------
shareppc Disk writable share
IPC$ IPC IPC Service (Samba 3.2.0)
Anonymous login successful
Domain=[CSWSAMBA] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.2.0]
Server Comment
--------- -------
TITAN Samba 3.0.31
VESTA Samba 3.2.0
Workgroup Master
--------- -------
CSWSAMBA TITAN
# /opt/csw/bin/nmblookup -d 2 '*'
added interface ip=192.168.35.42 bcast=192.168.35.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
added interface ip=127.0.0.1 bcast=127.255.255.255 nmask=255.0.0.0
querying * on 192.168.35.255
Got a positive name query response from 192.168.35.42 ( 192.168.35.42 )
Got a positive name query response from 192.168.35.8 ( 192.168.35.8 )
192.168.35.42 *<00>
192.168.35.8 *<00>
and of course a Linux based Samba 3.2.0 client can connect to the
Solaris 8 x86 samba 3.0.31 server .. and vice versa
# /opt/csw/bin/smbclient -d 2 -U smbtest //TITAN/share042
added interface eth0 ip=fe80::20b:2fff:fee7:fbcb%eth0
bcast=fe80::ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff%eth0 netmask=ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff::
added interface eth0 ip=192.168.35.8 bcast=192.168.35.255 netmask=255.255.255.0
added interface lo ip=::1 bcast=::1
netmask=ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff
added interface lo ip=127.0.0.1 bcast=127.255.255.255 netmask=255.0.0.0
Enter smbtest's password:
Domain=[TITAN] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.0.31]
smb: \> ls
. D 0 Sat Jul 12 02:38:24 2008
.. D 0 Thu Jul 24 00:02:46 2008
backup D 0 Mon Apr 28 01:53:01 2008
Program Files D 0 Mon Apr 28 01:29:01 2008
63266 blocks of size 524288. 24628 blocks available
smb: \>
And I can do the same thing from Microsoft Windows XP Pro :
C:\>net use X: \\TITAN\share042 /USER:CSWSAMBA\smbtest /PERSISTENT:NO
The password or user name is invalid for \\TITAN\share042.
Enter the password for 'CSWSAMBA\smbtest' to connect to 'TITAN':
The command completed successfully.
The TITAN Solaris x86 server reports reasonable status etc :
# /opt/csw/bin/smbstatus
Samba version 3.0.31
PID Username Group Machine
-------------------------------------------------------------------
7466 smbtest samba athlon (192.168.35.210)
7463 smbtest samba vesta (192.168.35.8)
Service pid machine Connected at
-------------------------------------------------------
share042 7466 athlon Thu Jul 24 00:51:08 2008
share042 7463 vesta Thu Jul 24 00:47:52 2008
Locked files:
Pid Uid DenyMode Access R/W Oplock
SharePath Name Time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7466 12345 DENY_NONE 0x100001 RDONLY NONE
/export/nfs/samba/share_042 . Thu Jul 24 00:52:32 2008
7466 12345 DENY_NONE 0x100001 RDONLY NONE
/export/nfs/samba/share_042 backup/dclarke/My
Documents/Downloads/sgd Thu Jul 24 00:54:01 2008
In any case .. I'm stuck looking at these packages and trying to
figure out what to do next.
Dennis
More information about the users
mailing list