vision-fs and Samba
Andrew Winks
I'm having quite a bit of trouble getting a Windows XP box to see the
SCO server with visionFS.
I think my easiest solution will be to install Samba on the SCO box.
My question is can I have Samba and VisionFS running on the box at the
same time?
My apologies if this is a stupid question.
Thanks for your help.
Andrew Winks
awinks AT umr D0T co D0T nz
Jean-Pierre Radley
| I am using SCO Openserver 5.0.4 and visionFS 1.02.
| I'm having quite a bit of trouble getting a Windows XP box to see the
| SCO server with visionFS.
| I think my easiest solution will be to install Samba on the SCO box.
|
| My question is can I have Samba and VisionFS running on the box at the
| same time?
No.
They both want to talk to port 139.
--
JP
Scott McMillan
Are you sure about that visionFS version number? We're using version
3.10.905 on OSR 5.0.6, and I found that 2 changes were required to get
our XP boxen to see the visionFS shares:
1) Go to Control Panel-> Administrative Tools-> Local Security Policy
-> Security Setting-> Local Policies-> Security Options
In Windows 2000: Change "Send unencrypted password to connect to
third-party SMB servers" to "Enabled"
In Windows XP: Change "Microsoft network client: Send unencrypted
password to connect to third-party SMB servers" to "Enabled"
Close down the Security Settings window.
2) Go to Start-> Run, type in regedit and click OK. Go to
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\MRxSmb\Parameters.
If there is no EnablePlainTextPassword entry, create it (DWORD
value) and set it's value to 1. If this entry does exist, verify
that the value is 1.
Close down the Registry Editor.
3) Reboot the Windows system.
As JP said, Samba and VisionFS will be competing for the same ports.
Scott McMillan
Jim Rendant
news:6ab312fd.03052...@posting.google.com...
I would not recommend Samba since it presents a memory leak. There is a
problem
from what I have seen on the NET with some socket calls. But I have yet to
see a fix.
Jim Rendant
Bela Lubkin
> I would not recommend Samba since it presents a memory leak. There is a
> problem
> from what I have seen on the NET with some socket calls. But I have yet to
> see a fix.
A perfectly servicable fix has been posted several times (in fact, about
4 different fixes, one of which is to use OSR507). Search
groups.google.com for "openserver samba leak patch". One thread
includes a reply from a Samba developer saying "I'm applying the change
to all branches.", so this is presumably fixed in the current CVS of
Samba 2.2.x. Ah, yes, the necessary patch is contained in:
http://cvs.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/lib/util_sock.c?rev=1.78
though this probably won't build correctly with Samba 2.2.8a due to
other changes. rev=1.77 has a better chance; otherwise, extract the
simple patch (search for "Openserver" in a comment).
>Bela<