[KLUG Members] Re: Quick samba q
Adam Bultman
members@kalamazoolinux.org
Fri, 1 Feb 2002 09:53:24 -0500 (EST)
RH 7.2, smbd 2.2.1a
I added the interfaces and bind comments, still doesn't work... Hmm...
I'll try some other stuff
On 31 Jan 2002, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-01-31 at 23:02, Adam Bultman wrote:
> > Hey all. Quick quyestion:
> > I've got a redhat box here with samba.
>
> Version numbers always help. ;-P
>
> > Everything is fineint he config , (i.e. testparm smb.conf is good) and
> > smbd and nmbd start fine, but I get this in my logs:
> > smbd/oplock.c:init_oplocks(1205)
> > open oplock_ipc: Failed to get Local UDP socket for address 100007f. Error
> > was Cannod Assign requested Address.
> > 1. What does this mean, and
> > 2. how do I fix it?
> > There's nothing on ports 139 , 137 besides the obvcious. I've checked the
> > net, but found no answers, and check the docs, and they don't hve the
> > right answers either.
>
> Are you setting "bind interfaces = yes"?
> If so, did you list "127.0.0.1" in your "interfaces = blah blah" line???
> If not, add it.
>
> FYI...
>
> Opportunistic Locks are a performance mechanism that allows multiple
> clients to access the same file, but do read/write caching. If you're
> only reading, it's usually fine. But if you are writing, it can be
> disasterous. The nice thing about Samba is that it will let you disable
> oplocks on a per-share basis (although you'll take a major performance
> hit when writing to that share -- but worth it when you need to maintain
> data integrity). Microsoft only lets you disabled them with a really
> bad registry hack (that is only semi-effective), and then its global.
>
> Linux needs to loopback (127.0.0.1) access for them to work (among other
> things).
>
> -- Bryan
>
>
--
Adam Bultman
adamb@glaven.org