On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 7:25 PM, NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> @ssc1478: You need to specify which version of Ubuntu you are talking
> about. Are you talking about 8.04 (hardy), 9.04 (jaunty), or 9.10
> (karmic)?

One is a laptop with 8.04 LTS and the other is a pc with 9.10. I need
to focus on the laptop since that's the one with the need.

As for nfs, I'll look into that too especially if its simple. I
started with samba because in the beginning I had one linux box and
many windows boxes. Now its about 50/50.

Phil

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

ssc1478 wrote:
> As for nfs, I'll look into that too especially if its simple. I
> started with samba because in the beginning I had one linux box and
> many windows boxes. Now its about 50/50.

Personally, and this might just be down to my history, I always default
to NFS, and resort to Samba if Windows hosts are involved. NFS is
vastly simpler to set up than Samba, and generally easier to
troubleshoot.

Alan's earlier email is pretty much it, on the server you list
in /etc/exports those directories you'd like to share (or, in nfs
lingo, export), restart the nfs server, and then on the client you
mount them as you would anything else, via mount or /etc/fstab.

There are also many, many tutorials on it on the web.

--
Avi Greenbury
http://aviswebsite.co.uk
http://aviswebsite.co.uk/asking-questions

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Avi Greenbury
<avismailinglistaccount@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Alan's earlier email is pretty much it

Yup, doesn't get a lot simpler than that. Why would someone choose
not to do this? Really beyond me why they would not.

--
“Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV�
- Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food"

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On 12/02/2009 07:26 AM, ssc1478 wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 7:25 PM, NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> @ssc1478: You need to specify which version of Ubuntu you are talking
>> about. Are you talking about 8.04 (hardy), 9.04 (jaunty), or 9.10
>> (karmic)?
>
> One is a laptop with 8.04 LTS and the other is a pc with 9.10. I need
> to focus on the laptop since that's the one with the need.
>
> As for nfs, I'll look into that too especially if its simple. I
> started with samba because in the beginning I had one linux box and
> many windows boxes. Now its about 50/50.
>
> Phil
>

Have a look at:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SettingUpSamba
https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/serverguide/C/samba-fileserver.html

For the laptop; 8.04 has/had issues with samba and attempting to find
the samba server by name. You may be better to resort to opening
Nautilus (Places|Home etc) and opening the location bar (just below
'Back' & clicking the paper/pencil) and entering:

smb://<ipaddressoftarget>

example:
smb://192.168.2.101/
you can also try by machine name:
smb://mymachine/

If that works w/o issues, then save as a bookmark so you can easily go
back.

Key hints: have all domains on the same workgroup (mshome, workgroup,
whatever). If it's a fixed local network consider assigning fixed IP's
to the local machines & then add to /etc/hosts. Example:

$ cat /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1 localhost gg2.mshome
127.0.1.1 gg2

# The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts
::1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
fe00::0 ip6-localnet
ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix
ff02::1 ip6-allnodes
ff02::2 ip6-allrouters
ff02::3 ip6-allhosts
192.168.2.101 dod
192.168.2.102 gg-x
192.168.2.103 ggm
192.168.2.107 ggm3
192.168.2.104 hls
192.168.2.105 cia
192.168.2.106 nsa

etc.

I do this on my machines & simply don't have issues going between the
*any* of Ubuntu machines, well, perhaps with the issue of file transfer
speed - and my test bed has machines/drives from hardy to karmic (all
32bit gnome) as well as dual-boot WinXP's and several VirtualBox Win2K VM's.

As for nfs; nothing wrong with nfs & Alan provided you with good
information regarding that setup. However I've found that samba (which
you did indeed ask about in your OP) works just fine for me. YMMV.








--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 11:19 -0500, Alan McKay wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Avi Greenbury
> <avismailinglistaccount@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Alan's earlier email is pretty much it
>
> Yup, doesn't get a lot simpler than that. Why would someone choose
> not to do this? Really beyond me why they would not.

1 reason: because it's beyond some people's thinking patterns to edit a
config file to share files.

My biggest question on this is why the "Right-click > Sharing Options"
no longer gives the option to install NFS, and why it doesn't allow one
to configure NFS shares from there... it only installs/configures
Samba... and not even that well imho.


--
Andrew
_____________________________
Registered Linux User: 473690
Registered Ubuntu User: 22747


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On 12/01/2009 04:55 PM, John Abbott wrote:
> Gee aren't these the very same bash commands that you were jumping on
> others about. I'm Unsubed so this may not post.

No worries. Plonk.



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

John Abbott wrote:

> Gee aren't these the very same bash commands that you were jumping on
> others about. I'm Unsubed so this may not post.

Gee. Didn't he offer a choice of CLI or GUI? (and, for that matter,
pedantically speaking, there were no "bash" commands).
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Alan McKay <alan.mckay@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yup, doesn't get a lot simpler than that. *Why would someone choose
> not to do this? *Really beyond me why they would not.
>

Just an extra data point in the NFS vs Samba debate, if you are going
to be using a mixed environment (i.e. the same files are going to be
shared to Windows machines via Samba and *nix machines via NFS), you
must turn oplocks off in your Samba config:

UNIX or NFS Client-Accessed Files

Local UNIX and NFS clients access files without a mandatory
file-locking mechanism. Thus, these client platforms are incapable of
initiating an oplock break request from the server to a Windows client
that has a file cached. Local UNIX or NFS file access can therefore
write to a file that has been cached by a Windows client, which
exposes the file to likely data corruption.

If files are shared between Windows clients and either local UNIX or
NFS users, turn oplocks off.

(copied from here:
http://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/locking.html#id2615920)

If you don't, then you can easily get data corruption if a Windows
machine opens a file, then a *nix machine opens and saves the same
file, then the Windows machine closes and saves the file. The Windows
machine will think that no one has opened the file or changed it while
it had it open and will likely lose any data from the NFS edit and can
possibly corrupt the file altogether. In a home network, with just
one or two people, this is probably less likely to happen, but in any
sizable environment, can happen easily.

In general, it has been my experience that NFS (especially NFS v4) is
significantly faster and more reliable for sharing data from a *nix to
*nix machine. That said, I have gone with Samba before due to
potential locking issues.

To the OP:
From the command line, try entering:

smbclient -L <ip_address_of_samba_server>

where <ip_address_of_samba_server> is replaced by the ip address of
your samba server. If you are using username and passwords to
authenticate, you may need to add -U <username> and then you will be
prompted for your password.

If the command works, you should get a list of shares on your server.
If you do, you then should (hopefully) be able to mount the share you
need and access it. You can even put it in your fstab to be mounted
at startup.

Take a look at this guide:

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/SMB-HOWTO-8.html

and see if it gets you any further. It has been my experience that
samba access through the Linux gui is flakey at best (just my
experience, I don't intend to start any kind of flame war). Even if
you don't usually use the command line, your best bet might be to
fight through it using the guide above and this list to just get your
samba shares mounted via the command line. Then you will be able to
access them in the GUI file manager and it should work well.

Preston

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users