Question about samba on solaris x86 - Solaris

This is a discussion on Question about samba on solaris x86 - Solaris ; If you have Linux on x86 running Samba, you are able to mount Windows NT shares. With Solaris x86, are you able to do the same? If so how? Thanks DOverbey@optonline.net...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Question about samba on solaris x86

  1. Question about samba on solaris x86

    If you have Linux on x86 running Samba, you are able to mount Windows NT
    shares. With Solaris x86, are you able to do the same? If so how?

    Thanks
    DOverbey@optonline.net



  2. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 03:18:37 +0000, Overbey wrote:

    > If you have Linux on x86 running Samba, you are able to mount Windows NT
    > shares.


    Wrong, it is unnecessary to be running Samba to mount Windows shares in
    Linux.

    > With Solaris x86, are you able to do the same? If so how?


    Google "sharity lite".


  3. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    Overbey wrote:
    > If you have Linux on x86 running Samba, you are able to mount Windows NT
    > shares. With Solaris x86, are you able to do the same? If so how?


    If you mean access shares on a NT/2K3 box from a Linux box running
    samba, then yes, nici o problema.
    Haven't done it using Sol x86, but samba should be samba anywhare, so...

    --
    Kind regards,
    Mogens V.


  4. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:39:16 +0200, Mogens V. wrote:

    > If you mean access shares on a NT/2K3 box from a Linux box running
    > samba, then yes, nici o problema.
    > Haven't done it using Sol x86, but samba should be samba anywhare, so...


    No. It has nothing to do with Samba and everything to do with smbfs being
    included in the kernel. Linux and FreeBSD have smbfs, Solaris does not.


  5. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    thanks, this was the answer I was looking for
    thanks to you all ---- it is appreciated.


    "Dave Uhring" wrote in message
    newsan.2006.04.17.23.52.51.291732@yahoo.com...
    > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:39:16 +0200, Mogens V. wrote:
    >
    > > If you mean access shares on a NT/2K3 box from a Linux box running
    > > samba, then yes, nici o problema.
    > > Haven't done it using Sol x86, but samba should be samba anywhare, so...

    >
    > No. It has nothing to do with Samba and everything to do with smbfs being
    > included in the kernel. Linux and FreeBSD have smbfs, Solaris does not.
    >




  6. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    Dave Uhring wrote:
    > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:39:16 +0200, Mogens V. wrote:
    >
    >
    >>If you mean access shares on a NT/2K3 box from a Linux box running
    >>samba, then yes, nici o problema.
    >>Haven't done it using Sol x86, but samba should be samba anywhare, so...

    >
    >
    > No. It has nothing to do with Samba and everything to do with smbfs being
    > included in the kernel. Linux and FreeBSD have smbfs, Solaris does not.


    I stand corrected. How well, or less good, is Solaris X86 in performance
    and stability with Samba and some 25+ users? Only used it privately..

    --
    Kind regards,
    Mogens V.


  7. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    Andrew Gabriel wrote:
    > In article <44456310$0$60784$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
    > "Mogens V." writes:
    >
    >>I stand corrected. How well, or less good, is Solaris X86 in performance
    >>and stability with Samba and some 25+ users? Only used it privately..

    >
    >
    > No problem at all, and rock solid stable for 50 users
    > (and that's on an old PC too). Getting the authentication
    > working can be fiddly.


    I which way?
    We're OpenLDAP based, currently running it on FreeBSD.
    I'd guess it wouldn work about the same on SolX86.

    Not that is should matter too much. We'll probably use a Sun setup for
    NFS/SMB/database only for some time.
    It's expected to be 2x Fire2100 hooked into a StorEdge3511.

    Remaining infraservices, incl. LDAP, running on either Debian or RHEL,
    meaning that users will authenticate on that system, and use SMB
    services on the Sun setup.

    See any [samba] problems here?

    --
    Kind regards,
    Mogens V.


  8. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    Mogens V. wrote:
    > Andrew Gabriel wrote:
    >> No problem at all, and rock solid stable for 50 users
    >> (and that's on an old PC too). Getting the authentication
    >> working can be fiddly.

    >
    > I which way?


    If you want ADS support, you have to recompile samba by yourself and cannot
    use the one supplied by Sun.

    > We're OpenLDAP based, currently running it on FreeBSD.
    > I'd guess it wouldn work about the same on SolX86.
    >
    > Not that is should matter too much. We'll probably use a Sun setup for
    > NFS/SMB/database only for some time.
    > It's expected to be 2x Fire2100 hooked into a StorEdge3511.
    >
    > Remaining infraservices, incl. LDAP, running on either Debian or RHEL,
    > meaning that users will authenticate on that system, and use SMB
    > services on the Sun setup.
    >
    > See any [samba] problems here?


    No real problems, just more work for setting it up. You'll need also:

    .. MIT Kerberos 5
    .. OpenSSL (can use the one in Solaris 10 though)
    .. Cyrus SASL
    .. OpenLDAP

    If you want pam and/or winbind support you should recompile everything as
    32/64 bit (for the pam/nss libraries), so no simple
    ../configure; make; make install

    --
    Daniel

  9. Re: Question about samba on solaris x86

    Daniel Rock wrote:
    > Mogens V. wrote:


    > If you want ADS support, you have to recompile samba by yourself and cannot
    > use the one supplied by Sun.
    >
    > No real problems, just more work for setting it up. You'll need also:
    >
    > . MIT Kerberos 5
    > . OpenSSL (can use the one in Solaris 10 though)
    > . Cyrus SASL
    > . OpenLDAP
    >
    > If you want pam and/or winbind support you should recompile everything as
    > 32/64 bit (for the pam/nss libraries), so no simple
    > ./configure; make; make install


    Thanks for the info, good to know. Still about choosing system, so...

    --
    Kind regards,
    Mogens V.


+ Reply to Thread