[KLUG Members] Runing Out of Re:'s on Samba reprocess config file question

[Bob Kanaley]

> Date: Fri,  8 Mar 2002 15:14:50 -0500
> From: adam@morrison-ind.com
> To: members@kalamazoolinux.org
> Subject: Re: [KLUG Members] Re:Samba reprocess config file question
> Reply-To: members@kalamazoolinux.org

> >Until I can figure out how to migrate my users to the new Monarch server
> >running on RedHat 7.2, my Samba server is Samba 1.9.18p5 ala May 1998
> >running on Red Hat 5.1 Kernel 2.0.36.
>
> Yikes!!!  Samba 1.9.x doesn't "support" anything much newer than NT4.0sp3.
> Running an old Samba with new/updated clients is as perilous as meddling
in the
> affairs of wizards.  M$ is constantly "tweaking" and extending the CIFS
> protocol and their RPC suite,  newer Samba's are aware of the tweaks and
adjust
> accordingly.

Fortunately, most of my users are stuck on Win98 SE and Lotus v5 with no
immediate path out.

I am supposed to be leading the migration from Lotus 123 to integration into
our M$ based accounting package that has manufacturing modules. It is
running on NT 4.0 sp6+ with a betrieve database engine, but for our
production app it looks like we have to move everything to M$ SQL server and
re-write the entire app so it works with the accounting and manufacturing
modules (Oh, Joy!!! ).

> I've seen M$ clients lock read-only files (even executables!).  Use
smbstatus
> to see if any funny locking is going on.

Unfortunatley, I don't know what funny locking is. Smbstatus was my first
approach to figure out what was going on, but I have trouble understanding
what the various combinations of DenyMode, R/W and Oplock mean for the
various smb clients, so I pretty much gave that up.

For example, I have seen EXCLUSIVE+BATCH Oplocks on DENY_NONE RDONLY files
while another file will have Oplock NONE on DENY_ALL RDWR. This makes no
sense to me.

Is it up to Samba to decide the type of Oplock or does the app ask Samba for
a specific type of Oplock? I have read most of the man pages, docs and
online books I can find about Samba, but I just don't get it.

> Do you have any "process no longer exists" messages in your log file?  We
have
> Lotus users, and Lotus exhibits the most bizarre file management
techniques.
> We've actually unconvered and reported Samba bugs based upon Lotus 123
> Millenium.  (It ain't much better sharing from a true M$ file server).

No, I didn't see any process no loger exists, messages, but I have seen some
really bizare entries where an SMBopenX fails and the next transaction opens
the file that doesn't exist (and then starts to write to it)!!!
For example I logged this last summer when several people were having samba
access problems.
.
stat of jwhitcomb/control data/1c6a1010 failed (No such file or directory)
2001/07/19 11:09:31 error packet at line 783 cmd=8 (SMBgetatr) eclass=1
ecode=2
error string = No such file or directory
2001/07/19 11:09:31 Transaction 30715 of length 102
switch message SMBopenX (pid 25928)
chdir to /home/account
chdir to /home/account
chdir to /home/bmd
unix_clean_name [./JWHITCOMB/CONTROL DATA/1C6A1010]
unix_clean_name [jwhitcomb/control data/1c6a1010]
Allocated new file_fd_struct 9, dev = ffffffff, inode = ffffffff
2001/07/19 11:09:31 kblum opened file jwhitcomb/control data/1c6a1010
read=Yes write=Yes (numopen=10 fnum=76)
set_share_mode: Created share record for jwhitcomb/control data/1c6a1010
(dev 2065 inode 2674712)
set_share_mode: Created share entry for jwhitcomb/control data/1c6a1010 with
mode 0x12 pid=25928

> Set level 10 logging for one machine and record the session.

I shall do so Monday.

And I shall try to get that new Samba server up ASAP.

Many thanks for all the help.