Mount samba shares with utf8 encoding using cifs

[dmizer]

Is this what I'd have gotten whether or not I'd install smbfs previously?

nope. remember, you reinstalled your os so you'll have to start from the beginning of the guide again.

Why on earth would I be getting THIS now?!

have you edited nsswitch.conf and installed winbind yet? if you've already done this, can you ping DELL-Ubuntu?

[wilberfan]

Okay...! When I redid the nsswitch.conf and winbind yet again, then rebooted, everything worked fine.

Now I'll have to experiment with those opendns workarounds...!

[dmizer]

well, congrats again. i'm really not sure if that fix will work with mount or not, but can't hurt to try it out.

let me know how it turns out.

[Abhi Kalyan]

WOWOWOWOWOWOWOWWO WOW,
Great People Thank you a TONEEEEEEEEE-
My kisses,
After a week
atlast
able to automount a drive so precious.
Thank you all
Thank you

A doubt-
The share that am mounting has variying access permissions for varying users,
Is it possible to automount in such a way that the permissions set on the .smbcredentials file gets changed with every user logging in.
Ex:
When user-zen logs in read write permission
when user-skylock logs in reaqd permission
when user-benking logs in no acces at all.
or does this have a connection to authenticating usning samba?

[wilberfan]

I have a question that's kind of in the same area as Abhi's...

I've got an fstab entry that works now...which allows me to access one designated folder on my Dell. You explained (earlier) how to use ssh to browse other folders, etc... I find that I am unable to copy/open any of the files that I access this way. (For example, there was an image I wanted to try as AMD wallpaper on the Dell--but couldn't copy it or open it.)

Is there an easy way to provide more complete access of one machine from the other?

[wilberfan]

OK, I have to ask: This thread is, in many ways, a response to Nautilus being a poor way to access Samba.

I've just learned that Konqueror works GREAT. Is cifs still a "better" choice to share files via samba? (dmizer has got to be rolling his eyes by now!)

8)

[der_joachim]

CIFS is very fast compared to smbfs. At work, I used smbfs for large folders with many small files. Sometimes it took a full minute to get a file listing in smbfs. Although CIFS needs some time in the beginning, it is very fast later on and it even seems to autorefresh.

To the OP: Thank you very much for this HOWTO. It helped me tremendously.

[dmizer]

A doubt-
The share that am mounting has variying access permissions for varying users,
Is it possible to automount in such a way that the permissions set on the .smbcredentials file gets changed with every user logging in.
Ex:
When user-zen logs in read write permission
when user-skylock logs in reaqd permission
when user-benking logs in no acces at all.
or does this have a connection to authenticating usning samba?

the permissions you desire are controlled by the computer hosting the share, not the computer mounting the share. so:
1) if your share is hosted by a linux machine, you'll have to configure smb.conf on the remote computer for permissions (first link in my sig).
2) if the remote computer is a windows machine, i'm not too sure how to tell you to restrict permissions that way.

CIFS is very fast compared to smbfs. At work, I used smbfs for large folders with many small files. Sometimes it took a full minute to get a file listing in smbfs. Although CIFS needs some time in the beginning, it is very fast later on and it even seems to autorefresh.

To the OP: Thank you very much for this HOWTO. It helped me tremendously.

so glad to know it helped!

OK, I have to ask: This thread is, in many ways, a response to Nautilus being a poor way to access Samba.

I've just learned that Konqueror works GREAT. Is cifs still a "better" choice to share files via samba? (dmizer has got to be rolling his eyes by now!)

8)

well, actually, it depends on your needs. if, say, you regularly copy files larger that 2 gig across your network, even konq is not a good choice. cifs is the only protocol which can handle large file support. one of my biggest complaints about nautilus (and perhaps konq as well) is that i can't save a file directly to my server from my browser/word processor/gimp etc. speed is sometimes also an issue if you want to listen to music hosted on a windows server. but if konq does what you need it to do, and you like kde ... nothing wrong with that.

personally, i prefer gnome. i find it less flashy and (when configured correctly) faster than kde. i also have several computers with alternative desktops like fluxbox and icewm which do not have any mount capability from their file managers, as well as two servers with no gui at all. so it's easier for me to learn one way to mount my shares that works on all my (seven) different machines.

and, while i realize not everyone's computing needs are like my own, i'm also aware that it's near impossible to write a samba mount howto which can cover all the gui possibilities available to ubuntu. i also believe that, for a person using linux, it's essential to know how things work and why, because education is key to keeping linux secure and safe for future users. or in other words, linux is different than windows, and that's a good (though sometimes frustrating) thing.

as for your ssh questions, since it's really not in the scope of this thread, take a look here: http://easylinux.info/wiki/Ubuntu_dapper#SSH_Server ... you can also mount a remote computer using ssh and fuse.

[dannyboy79]

ive got a weird one for ya, i just tried switching from smbfs to cifs because I was having the error localhost kernel: [603328.573736] smb_add_request: request
and guess what cifs returns when i do sudo mount -a. it states: mount.cifs failed: password in credentials file too long. and my password is only 10 characters long!! now it does start with puncuation and has letters, numbers, capital letters, a symbol, and then it ends with puncuation but it sure is hell isn't 64 chars long. i checked out the cifs code, it came up in gogle, and when i do a find for credentials in the cifs code, sure enough, there is a line that states: if(length > 64) {
printf("mount.cifs failed: password in credentials file too long\n");
memset(line_buf,0, 4096);
if(mountpassword) {
memset(mountpassword,0,64);

so what is up with this? should I post a bug?

[dmizer]

is there a blank line after the username and password in the credentials file? cifs reads the blank line as an eof, so if no eof, the password looks infinite.