Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Originally posted by pepino As you can see it says Anonymous login successful, so it is not a login problem...
Actually it appears it is. What OS is the windows box running? Pembo13 is correct about a user name. You need an account on the windows box to use. Right now with the command as you typed it, using root, samba is attempting to access the windows share with an account named "root" on your windows box with the password you supplied. I'm going to guess you don't have a account called root on your windows box...
Got the same message 1,000 times when I realized I needed to have the security level set to Medium, not High on my RH 9.0 machine
That is why I believe that geeks should never use an easy distro...there must have been a ton of other security features turned off that you never knew about when you only needed to maybe change a few lines of your smb.conf file.
I would have to disaggree with you. 12 months ago two things turned me to Linux....my hatred for Windows and RedHat 8. Since then I've gone from not knowing how to copy a file to recompiling my Kernel...all with lots of howto's of course..
Let's try to remember we're all on the same side here. I run a Mac and my Linux Dell 99% of the time and we're all working toward the same goal. I've only run these Unix platforms for a couple of months, so I'm a newbie. Cut the newbies some slack or the community will never grow.
I give newbs slack, heck, I give them lycoris if they want it. I believe that ease of use is the only way linux will take control of the desktop market. I really only stated that geeks, the people who arn't just using linux because microsoft sucks, shouldn't be using the easier distros.
I think this because I know that when I used mandrake I had no idea what was going on, but heck, I had samba working. Now I have went back to slackware and gotten a pocket reference to samba and have a much better home network setup and am working on a schema for a 30-40 person company network.
I think slackware just makes you dig into your system more. Redhat is just fine if you want something that just plain works though, it's all personal preference.
Fair enough. Can you help a RH using geek out, then, and help me learn how to get my Apple to mount my Dell (RH 9.0)'s shares with the firewall on 'medium' or 'high' then? Right now I have disable the firewall to get the samba shares mounted. I ONLY do this behind my Linksys ethernet firewall and only for a few minutes to synch my school files to the Mac as a backup. Then I have to open a terminal, su, turn off Samba and enable the firewall again in order to feel secure. This all might be overkill given that I'm behind the Linksys but I'm paranoid. So what ports do I need to open with the firewall up in order for SAMBA to hear the Mac calling? I tried a few ports using a shell script like
/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
trying various ports but have had no luck. Any ideas?
I haven't gotten my Linux Red Hat Dell to work as server with the firewall on yet. The iptables entries in the above link didn't work for me so I am still forced to turn off the firewall in order to get my Mac to mount the Linux Dell's shares. When I try to mount the Apple's SAMBA shares I can do it with the firewall on 'medium.'
NOTE: I'm not an idiot: I ONLY do this when I'm at home behind a Linksys firewall Router on my ETHERNET network. The only other machine on that network is my Mac. Because of a heavy classload I haven't been able to find the time to fix the issue. My work around is I have two shell scripts: one disables the firewall and turns on samba. The other turns the firewall back on and turns off SAMBA. This way I am only exposed when I move files. It's a pain and I want to find the answer but I don't have time right now.
I know I sound like a hack to the experienced users on this board but guess what: we need to get Linux to be easier to use than this if we are going to expand this community to the consumer XP and one of RH 9.0, and I run a Mac in OS X as well as Windows. And yet I can't get a handle on this problem. How much time will an 'average' user spend on issues like these before giving up? We'll never take down Windows untill we get some basic things to the point where they're easier than this.
I too had trouble getting Samba to work on 2 Red Hat 9 machines. I used the info from the link I posted above but that didn't work for me either. After doing some more searching, I discovered another thread dealing with Samba and found out that it is important that the IPTable enteries be placed in a certain order. I don't really understand why but I followed the directions in this post (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...629#post354629) and it has worked fine ever since.