Comments on: Windows 98 File Sharing: Broken By Design http://www.kuliniewicz.org/blog/archives/2003/12/21/windows-98-file-sharing-broken-by-design/ After all, it could only cost you your life, and you got that for free. Mon, 28 Jan 2013 23:45:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.5 By: Eric Leons http://www.kuliniewicz.org/blog/archives/2003/12/21/windows-98-file-sharing-broken-by-design/comment-page-1/#comment-98 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=44#comment-98 In the spirit of old Gentoo Linux forums, I ask can the logs for Samba be seen, Windows may be stupid but it isnt this stupid, I am living proof since I am using Samba between Gentoo and Xp right now.

]]>
By: Paul Kuliniewicz http://www.kuliniewicz.org/blog/archives/2003/12/21/windows-98-file-sharing-broken-by-design/comment-page-1/#comment-99 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=44#comment-99 All the versions of Windows derived from the NT code base, including Windows XP, have a fairly sane implementation of file sharing and don’t suffer from this problem. I’ve done cross-user mounting on Win2K and WinXP without any problem.

However, the Windows 95/98 (and I presume Me as well) don’t allow you to specify user names in any way. The help for “net use”, for example, entirely lacks the /USER flag.

To be fair, however, I still can’t tell if the real cause of the problem is the Win98 end or some subtle misconfiguration of Samba. I see a few things in the logs that look a little weird, so there still may be hope to get this to work.

If I still don’t have any luck, I don’t see what harm posting the relevant logs could have.

]]>
By: Paul Kuliniewicz http://www.kuliniewicz.org/blog/archives/2003/12/21/windows-98-file-sharing-broken-by-design/comment-page-1/#comment-100 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=44#comment-100 After another hour or so of poking around in /etc/samba/smb.conf, it appears I got things into some semblance of working! I don’t know what exactly did it, since I was fiddling with pretty much everything. I think it may have had something to do with mapping all users to user nobody (i.e., the account for guest access), along with some other changes that I’m afraid I don’t fully understand. This would at least seem to get around Windows 98′s apparent insistence on logging in as *somebody*.

What I’ve done is offer my entire hard drive as a guest-access share under user nobody. This effectively makes it a read-only share except for /tmp. Downloading files from my computer is easy. Uploading them requires two steps: uploading to /tmp and then, locally, moving them to wherever they should go. This certainly isn’t a particularly secure setup, but it’s just a home LAN with two effective users: me and my sister.[0] It’ll at least allow for file transfers much faster than SSH/SCP would allow — since one of the machines is an aging 133 MHz Pentium, the time needed to encrypt and decrypt limited transfer rates to 30-40 KB/sec.

The configuration I have now could probably be improved upon, but there’s two sayings that I think apply right now:

1. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
2. If you’re going to fix it anyway, don’t do it at a quarter past one in the morning.

[0] I’ve got a nifty little script I’m beta-testing right now that lets you start services only when you’re connected to a certain network; once I move my computer off the home LAN, Samba won’t get started at all.

]]>