samba on ubuntu issues

Whether you are using Linux on the desktop or as a server, it's still good that you're using Linux. Linux related questions go here.

Moderator: General Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Burrito
Spockulator
Posts: 4715
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: Eden, Utah

samba on ubuntu issues

Post by Burrito »

I can't seem to get samba to work correctly:

this is what I have done:

sudo apt-get install samba
sudo apt-get install smbfs
sudo smbpasswd -a burrito

then typed and confirmed my password

then in /etc/samba/smbusers I added this line:
burrito = burrito
I also tried
burrito = "burrito"
and (thinking maybe I had to have a different name:
burrito = burritos

next in: /etc/samba/smb.conf I uncommented this line

security = user

and added this line right below it:

username map = /etc/samba/smbusers

finally I added this to the end of my smb.conf file:


[music]
comment = music folder
path = /var/www/music
public = yes
writable = yes
valid users = burrito
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
force user = nobody
force group = nobody


I also tried it w/o the 'valid users' directive

after saving my file I ran 'testparm' and received this for my output

burrito@tacostand:/etc/samba# sudo testparm
Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf
Processing section "[printers]"
Processing section "[print$]"
Processing section "[music]"
Loaded services file OK.
WARNING: passdb expand explicit = yes is deprecated
Server role: ROLE_STANDALONE
Press enter to see a dump of your service definitions


which looks ok to me...save the one minor warning.

I then restarted my samba services and tried to map a drive from my windows xp machine adn get this error:

"The mapped network drive could not be created because the following error has occurred: An extended error has occurred"

I'm at a complete loss of what to try next, can anyone shed some light on this please?
Charles256
DevNet Resident
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by Charles256 »

have you tried installing from the synpatec package manager instead of manually?
User avatar
Burrito
Spockulator
Posts: 4715
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: Eden, Utah

Post by Burrito »

nope, I'm not even sure what that is.

in any case I think I'm going to have to modify the smb.conf file though correct?
User avatar
Todd_Z
Forum Regular
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: U Michigan

Post by Todd_Z »

Charles256 wrote:have you tried installing from the synpatec package manager instead of manually?
The package manager is just a gui front end for the apt-get commands, nothing would be different if you went through the gui than if you use the cli.
User avatar
Burrito
Spockulator
Posts: 4715
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: Eden, Utah

Post by Burrito »

ahh...I didn't even install the gui, I guess that's why I didn't see it.

back on topic: does anyone have any ideas why my samba isn't working?
Charles256
DevNet Resident
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by Charles256 »

figured he might see a more updated version or something :-D
User avatar
Chris Corbyn
Breakbeat Nuttzer
Posts: 13098
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Chris Corbyn »

Charles256 wrote:figured he might see a more updated version or something :-D
Nope, same manager. FYI `apt-cache search samba' would list the packages matching samba.
User avatar
Burrito
Spockulator
Posts: 4715
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: Eden, Utah

Post by Burrito »

well I broke down and installed the GUI, and tried sharing a folder from within Gnome.

it worked.

I then checked what it did to smb.conf and the only diff between what it did and what I did was it didn't have the 'force user = nobody' nor the 'force user = group' options.

I changed that on the folder I tried to share...and guess what, it worked. I then looked at the samba logs to see if they would show me anything and they did, they said something about not having a group 'nobody'. I was under the impression that 'nobody' meant 'nobody' and I didn't need to have a 'group' for that. apparently I was wrong.

can any of you explain the group system to me and tell me about 'nobody'?
User avatar
Chris Corbyn
Breakbeat Nuttzer
Posts: 13098
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Chris Corbyn »

Burrito wrote:well I broke down and installed the GUI, and tried sharing a folder from within Gnome.

it worked.

I then checked what it did to smb.conf and the only diff between what it did and what I did was it didn't have the 'force user = nobody' nor the 'force user = group' options.

I changed that on the folder I tried to share...and guess what, it worked. I then looked at the samba logs to see if they would show me anything and they did, they said something about not having a group 'nobody'. I was under the impression that 'nobody' meant 'nobody' and I didn't need to have a 'group' for that. apparently I was wrong.

can any of you explain the group system to me and tell me about 'nobody'?
"nobody" is just a group and a user on most linux systems. The privileges for these are next to none so processes often run under the user group in order to lower the risk in the event of exploits etc. It's just a logical name to use for something like that. My apache server runs as "nobody".

Glad you got it working anyway :)
User avatar
Burrito
Spockulator
Posts: 4715
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: Eden, Utah

Post by Burrito »

so should 'nobody' be set up by default?
Post Reply