Samba not installed by default?

[user1397]

I just noticed yesterday that I did not have samba installed so I couldn't access my network until I sudo apt-get install'd it.

Shouldn't it be installed by default? I thought I remember it being installed by default on older ubuntu releases.

[CharlesA]

You can choose to install it when you install the server OS.

I prefer installing it after I create all the users and crap, so I don't have to do more work. :P

[sisco311]

You are prompted to install it when you try to share a file.

[user1397]

Yea but shouldn't it be installed by default for users to be able to view shared files in their home networks? When I went to Places > Network > Windows Network, it didn't prompt me to install samba it just gave me an error pop-up.

[CharlesA]

What was the error you got?

I've browsed to files on my network from a clean install of Ubuntu Desktop. No errors.

[user1397]

What was the error you got?

I've browsed to files on my network from a clean install of Ubuntu Desktop. No errors.
this was the error:

"Unable to mount location
Failed to retrieve share list from server"

[juancarlospaco]

Unix dont need Samba, you can use SSH or NFS,
also SMB protocol creates a spamm on broadcast packages, eat bandwith.

[CharlesA]

What OS are you trying to connect to?

[user1397]

What OS are you trying to connect to?Windows and/or OS X

[cariboo]

Ubuntu connects to Windows by default, without having to install any extra software. You have problems elsewhere.

I would suggest you start a thread in the support forums, to get help solving the problem.

[user1397]

Ubuntu connects to Windows by default, without having to install any extra software. You have problems elsewhere.

I would suggest you start a thread in the support forums, to get help solving the problem.I don't have any problems, I was just wondering why samba isn't installed by default. And how can ubuntu connect to windows so magically without samba?

[Morbius1]

The samba package is a server package. It's purpose is for you to serve your folders to others on your network. It can however control certain aspects of a client and should be there by default.

Anyone who has ever gotten this error:

Server requested LANMAN password (share-level security) but 'client lanman auth' is disabledwhen trying to access a remote share knows the only fix is to add:

client lanman auth = Yes
lanman auth = Yes to the smb.conf of the client and restart the samba service. Comes up mostly with NAS devices.


So I agree with you that it should be installed by default but not for the reason you stated.

[humphreybc]

Samba probably isn't installed by default due to size:

samba is 18.3MB

samba-common is 733kB

samba-common-bin is 14.3MB

That is a LOT of space when you're trying to fit an entire OS and a library of applications on a 700MB CD.

[Cuddles McKitten]

The server shouldn't be installed by default for security reasons if nothing else. Open ports = bad. Open ports that can allow remote access to hard drive when misconfigured = very bad.

The client, on the other hand, probably should be installed by default. I'm guessing the size reason mentioned above is one of the main factors.

[Icehuck]

Out of the box nautilus will connect to samba shares.

[cariboo]

Smbclient is in the default Ubuntu installation allowing you to connect to Windows shares.