smbfs support broken in FC7?

[Bill Davidsen]

Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On 8/16/07, Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com> wrote:
>> Note: this question is not "what do I use instead of smbfs" it's "how do
>> I get smbfs working?" FAQs read, searches done, not interested in CIFS
>> since the server doesn't speak it. I need to get data off a machine
>> which speaks only SMB, so I'm looking for ways to do that. I have two
>> servers which write logs I need, and I'm tired of using an old FC1 box
>> to do it. Surely core functionality like SMB hasn';t really been
>> removed, has it?
>>
>> Using CIFS, linking mount.cifs to mount.smbfs, downloading several
>> smbmount "replacements" which don't work, and other obvious things found
>> in a few hours of search and swear testing. The error was
>>   error 112 = host is down
>> which I guess means "host wants to talk SMB not CIFS" in reality.
>>
>> Other info:
>> .  smbtree can see the filesystems required, discard all the hardware,
>> network, etc, guesses
>> . the new machines with FC7 send packets to the right host, but they
>> aren't using SMB
>>   as confirmed by tcpdump, discard DNS guesses
>> . the host is up for ping and ftp, and various other distributions from
>> FC1 to FC4 are able to mount
>>   the f/s (those were the machines not in production) discard host and
>> server problem guesses

> 
> If the machine speaks SMB, then CIFS will work, most likely, you're
> trying to mount using the netbios names.
> 
Just what other names do you expect the old server to know? As noted in 
the O.P. smbtree can see the machine and the shares, and they have the 
names I'm using. I don't know where any other names would appear.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot