Samba

Craig White craigwhite at azapple.com
Tue Apr 4 20:11:25 UTC 2006


On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 20:54 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 April 2006 20:38, Craig White wrote:
> > here's my issue - that I see OP asking a question and the answer is
> > wrong and doesn't even comport to man page - obviously your answer
> > didn't comport to man page because you couldn't find the right man page.
> > In fact your answer was to tell him to use 'security = user' accompanied
> > by an awkward explanation which didn't begin to solve his problem.
> >
> I have said from the start that my experience was not from the man page you 
> quoted.  Here's my issue - you argue endlessly, but you do not give the 
> original posters a solution to their problem in language they can understand.
----
I surely did with my original post at 6:15 this morning.

I don't mean to be argumentative but when the advice given is uncertain
and you don't have the man pages to guide you, it's probably better to
qualify the advice.
----
> > once again, you have given confusing if not inaccurate. If the user and
> > password and workgroup are the same, a Win98 and a Win2K connection to a
> > 'security = user' samba would be handled in the same manner so I fail to
> > see what you mean by 'all that has changed'
> >
> Since I do not use 'security = user' that is irrelevant.
----
you suggested that OP use 'security = user' so that makes it relevant in
my mind.
----
> 
> > One of the differences between 'security = user' and 'security = share'
> > is that a Windows client can access different shares with different
> > passwords in 'security = share' but not with 'security = user'
> >
> The point I was making was that the user on a win98 box was often unaware that 
> he was logging in.  IIRC the norm was for the windows login details to be 
> passed to samba for authentication, without the user necessarily being aware 
> of it.
> 
> This thread is not helping either of the original posters.  Please give them 
> the simplest instructions you can.
----
I thought I did in my first reply to this thread

1 - clarified 'security = share' as opposed to 'security = shares'
2 - referred to man page which described all the possible uses of user
settings for login/permissions control for a 'security = share' setting.

Craig




More information about the users mailing list