packet signing, which we don't support. Looking for a fix, not a workaround
Ok, the common workaround that people seem to have accepted as a 'fix' is disabling packet signing on the server. Now, if I were a user that was sitting at a single desk in a single company all the time, I might try and convince the sysop that it ain't such a bad idea.
However, I roam, my desk is whereever my work takes me and my apple is my office. Now the Apple tauts interoperabillity, and usually lives up to the claim. In this case however I am stumped. Samba3 supports packet signing, some of my colleagues use linux distro's on their laptops and connect without a sweat to the same machines that I get bounced off. So, Samba should be capable, OS X 10.4. are we at 6 alread? is not capable.
Now, to get back to my question, has anybody here the knowledge to fix this? Logically I would say manually updating Samba. I've tried using the samba3 package from darwinports, which installs fine, but how do I tell mount_smbfs to use the somewhat new(ish) samba 3.0.20b binary instead of the crippled and outdated 3.0.10 that comes packaged with OSX. Or do you have a different idea to crack this egg. (And no fiddling with the server, I can't be bothered to request someone to 'fix' their server every time I walk into a different company).
Your truly,
Martin
However, I roam, my desk is whereever my work takes me and my apple is my office. Now the Apple tauts interoperabillity, and usually lives up to the claim. In this case however I am stumped. Samba3 supports packet signing, some of my colleagues use linux distro's on their laptops and connect without a sweat to the same machines that I get bounced off. So, Samba should be capable, OS X 10.4. are we at 6 alread? is not capable.
Now, to get back to my question, has anybody here the knowledge to fix this? Logically I would say manually updating Samba. I've tried using the samba3 package from darwinports, which installs fine, but how do I tell mount_smbfs to use the somewhat new(ish) samba 3.0.20b binary instead of the crippled and outdated 3.0.10 that comes packaged with OSX. Or do you have a different idea to crack this egg. (And no fiddling with the server, I can't be bothered to request someone to 'fix' their server every time I walk into a different company).
Your truly,
Martin
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
p.s. the reason I suggest this is you'll be opening up a world of pain by rolling your own samba
ASKER
What if I'm willing to suffer the consequences? Any tips on where to start? I've used fink or that-other-tool (forgot the name) to install a new sambaclient, but off course osx won't use it unless I try fiddling with it in Terminal.
Also I know how to make a samba build, at least on Suse and Redhat so I should be able to do it in OS X, and I'm willing to mess with one, but: I need to know if I can integrate that new build (assuming I can get it to work) with the rest of OS X. And I would just like to know how/where to start. I won't bother you with the consequences, this I promise! I'll throw in a disclaimer:
- I will not hold you responsible for any failure to boot my mac after hacking it.
- I will not bother you with my own samba build's failure to connect to 2003.
- I will not hold you responsible for my mac's failure to connect to any windows machine as a result of hacking it.
I just want to know where to start hacking a new samba build into it, that's all :) And if you wish I'll let you know wether I failed or succeeded in getting it to work.
If a linux box can do it, so must I ;) And if it really doesn't work, I have cloned my disk, I'll revert and I'll give DAVE a go :)
Also I know how to make a samba build, at least on Suse and Redhat so I should be able to do it in OS X, and I'm willing to mess with one, but: I need to know if I can integrate that new build (assuming I can get it to work) with the rest of OS X. And I would just like to know how/where to start. I won't bother you with the consequences, this I promise! I'll throw in a disclaimer:
- I will not hold you responsible for any failure to boot my mac after hacking it.
- I will not bother you with my own samba build's failure to connect to 2003.
- I will not hold you responsible for my mac's failure to connect to any windows machine as a result of hacking it.
I just want to know where to start hacking a new samba build into it, that's all :) And if you wish I'll let you know wether I failed or succeeded in getting it to work.
If a linux box can do it, so must I ;) And if it really doesn't work, I have cloned my disk, I'll revert and I'll give DAVE a go :)
ok - but before we start could you download the free trial of dave and see what happens
ASKER
NP, though it might take a while before I can get back to you on it. At the office I'm developing right now they've 'fixed' the problem by setting the group policy on the server as there's more Mac-users than just me. I won't be able to test dave until I get back home. From the site it seems they support packet signing as I quote "Providing SMB signing and Dfs support". Call me crazt but I'm just a little unwilling at this time to shell out another 120 dollars for something that should have been working in the first place.
ASKER
Sorry to have taken this long. DAVE works, though I still don't want to pay for something that I think oughta be available. However, googling around the net has thought me some more on this subject and as a result I think I might just have to leave things be.
It seems the capacity to mount smb/cifs shares is not something that samba was made for. Samba is the server implementation, it just happens to include the client binaries out of a courtesy. The actual kernel-extention seems to be part of the distribution though, not samba, but the os. So that would mean waiting for apple to supply us with an updated mount_smbfs. Which means shelling out money cause they won't likely update it on 10.4 :(
Oh well, for now I'll credit you for coming up with DAVE, as it seems to work and replacing binaries in the existing osx install might be a trifle too dangerous for most. I will most likely go ahead and try it anyway and if you want to know about my progress let me know and I will, in turn, keep you posted.
Martin out...
It seems the capacity to mount smb/cifs shares is not something that samba was made for. Samba is the server implementation, it just happens to include the client binaries out of a courtesy. The actual kernel-extention seems to be part of the distribution though, not samba, but the os. So that would mean waiting for apple to supply us with an updated mount_smbfs. Which means shelling out money cause they won't likely update it on 10.4 :(
Oh well, for now I'll credit you for coming up with DAVE, as it seems to work and replacing binaries in the existing osx install might be a trifle too dangerous for most. I will most likely go ahead and try it anyway and if you want to know about my progress let me know and I will, in turn, keep you posted.
Martin out...
Glad things are working out - I'd love to hear back if you get things working your way (the right way!)