All he needed was sshfs....yet you guys spent 4 pages trying to teach him samba instead... :facepalm:

Judging from OP's description of what they need (4 laptops on LAN with some shared directories on each, with ability to read/write those shared directories from every laptop), it would be Samba, not sshfs, because sshfs has the same problem as NFS -- the shared directories won't automatically appear on other laptops, when any one laptop is taken somewhere else and later brought back to home LAN. Unfortunately, OP chose to pursue NFS path for whatever reason, and I don't think there's any way to make it work like OP described.

I have the share1 on the desktop, do I need to create it as well in /mnt /share1?

Yes. That is mount point for share1. Which is remote folder in this case. It can be different name.

The problem is that the OP is not reading what we "lost time to write for him", and not very thankful on top of that. If he was more humble, saying that he doesn't know what a server is, etc. We could have focus faster to a "simple and dumb" solution... Samba/Sshfs have been proposed almost immediately.

I find nice than some continue to answer positively, because reading about the "wasted time" while we tried to help, made me regret the will to help this guy. But I don't have Didier's patience ;).

Maybe I don't know the term server in linux language, but I do know what a server is. I have a L2TP Server which requires certificates to access the server. I created it myself, yes I know it Windows. So before you start guessing about what I know and don't know, you should check my resume. And yet you post crying about if I said thanks or not. People like you who post hot air, is the reason why it took so long for me to get it going. It was other users really helpful when they broke down the instructions which I am grateful for.

I have officially connected 2 of my laptops. Thanks to the ones who actually help. And to hell for the ones who didn't. You know who you are? I'm not going at everyone, just those specific ones.
Again, thanks for all the help.

Sorry to disagree, but you don't know what "server" means... Linux or not... A Server is a kind of component in SOFTWARE architecture... A computer have thousands of software... That we call a machine "server" is just a shortcut, but in fact it's serving some SOFTWARE services. So if you have a "Web Server" it's not that the machine is a server, it's because you got an APACHE (or equ) daemon which act as a HTTP server.

Anyway, I'd be glad to help, but you should first understand that you don't know much, and that most of the people here are veteran in software engineering, and you'd be wise to read what they said instead of acting like a "know-it-all", while, obviously, you don't know much to ask the question you ask.

BTW: I was the first to answer you, with the more pertinent choice I guess -> SAMBA.. Now you can piss on my advice as you wish, but you sounds like a spoiled kid.

But I don't have bassmadrigal's patience ;).

That's because bassmadrigal is a kind of wise shaman ;).

I've been in PROBLEMCHYLD's position, as well as similar positions to many others who have come here with problems. I was a lurker for a long time on the forum just soaking in information. I've learned by watching you guys and I just try to keep the information flowing to others :)

Hopefully I continue to have this kind of patience once my wife and I have a kid (probably still a few years down the road)... although, if that kid is anything like I was growing up, it will be quite the achievement to keep patient ;)

@ NoStressHQ

So you are upset because I didn't use your advice but someone else's? WOW!!!!
You seem to be caught in your feelings. If had the time, I would learn everything about Windows, Mac and Linux.
I chose NFS because I had already started to configure my system with it. I think its funny you claim I don't know what server is or mean, despite the fact I have setup a few in my lifetime. Again, you don't know anything, you just make assumptions and constantly polluting the thread with your whining. Please go have a bottle!!!!!!!
I have showed gratitude to the contributors. You, on the other hand have done nothing but complain.
I'm married with 2 kids by the way. I'm a grown @ss man, not a little boy. I don't care to go back and forth with you. Just go on about your business and all will be fine. You seem like a stalker for some reason.

I'm not upset, I'm astonished how you wrote this "emotional blackmail" about returning to windows while you had wasted time here... At the same time, several users from this forum tried to help...
And if I'd be upset, that would be about how you can't understand what we wrote, and bend it to victimize yourself while you are over-aggressive.

Physical age is irrelevant, "childish" attitude is.

It wasn't blackmail, it was frustration. We all get it some time in life. If I had given up, I wouldn't have conquered success. I'm a fighter no matter how upset I get. I'll stick it out.

I have a couple issues

1. When I put the command in fstab, it does NOT auto mount. I have to manually mount the shares.

2. When I'm connected to one of the shares, the computer hangs if I try to shutdown, hibernate or suspend.

How do I fix these issues?

We'd need to see your configuration line to first see if there's any issues with that. For 101, you should have something similar to the following:

(Apologies... I mixed up the last two numbers in my previous post. Since you're not likely to need this filesystem dumped (first number) or fsck'd (second number), they should both be zero. See man fstab for more details.

If you have that in there, and it doesn't automount, what happens when you try to run mount -a? Does it mount, or do you get an error message. Keep in mind, you can't mount a remote system if that system isn't up, so since you have two computers, one (A) won't be able to automount the other (B) since you'd have to have it (A) up and running before the other (B) can connect to it. Kinda a round-robin situation. Once both computers are up, you should be able to run mount -a on the systems that weren't automounted to have it done.

I imagine this is another problem with your "round robin" setup. When you go to shut down A, B is still connected to A because of the mounted drive. This could cause hangings since B won't release A's mount just because A wants to shut down. You'd probably have to manually umount A from B to be able to shut down the computer. This is why you typically have a server handle the NFS rather than "workstations" like you currently have set up. The server would have no need to mount the workstation shares to it, and you tend to not restart the server. So, when you go to restart a workstation, it umounts the network drive, then proceeds with other shutdown processes.

I don't know an easy way to fix this other than to not have your round robin setup.

@PROBLEMCHYLD

Using NFS on laptops via WIFI without even an automounter is utterly stupid.



I already told you how.


Cheers

Fighter must fight :-)

Ad1. NEtwork interface must be up before mount. Try add _netdev option to fstab.Hope helps.

Ad2. It happens sometimes when NFS server is down before unmounting nfs shares (default in Slack rc.6 script). Add hard,intr or soft to fstab options.

If that not work try force

before udev stop or if you use Network manager before it brings down network interfaces.

I don't think _netdev is in use in the Slackware start up scripts. However, Pat specifically prevents mount networking filesystems with the following section out of rc.S

Then, after networking services are set up (although, only rc.inet1... not before Network Manager itself is brought up), the final mount command is given.

But, if Network Manager is being used, it probably wouldn't hurt to either modify rc.M to start Network Manager earlier or just add a mount -a to the rc.local or Network Manager's hooks.

Well, I didn't and can't try (I have only one laptop) but the using Samba as suggested by Ivandi looks simpler.

Does NOT work in fstab

192.168.0.102:/home/bob/Desktop/share2 /mnt/share2 nfs defaults 0 0


Does work in terminal, loaded manually

mount -a

mount -t nfs 192.168.0.102:/home/bob/Desktop/share2 /mnt/share2

It is not about startup script but NFS client fstab entry especially if one use Network MAnager but is good to use it with every mounted network filesystems.

I do use NM if it helps......

Check this:

I only have laptops at the moment. And, what do mean by automounter? At BradPit, I'm about to try you commands posted.

Well, it you take the time to really read Ivandi's post, you will see what he means: that you shouldn't use NFS, not that you shouldn't use laptops.

What do you need to make an Internet search: knowledge or motivation?

PS Not all articles on Wikipedia are enlightening, but the Automounter article is one of them, in my opinion.

Neither, but if google or the web had all the answers, you and others wouldn't be here posting. I'm old-fashion. I tell people all the time, there is a lot of misinformation on the web, and having spending countless of hours and weeks, sometimes months etc... Searching for solutions that don't exist is a dead end. I hope you not one of those people, the internet has every answer known to man. If thats the case we should all be billionaires, have huge mansions, hot women etc.... I do search the web and spend many hours to come up shorthanded. I'm getting older not younger grasshopper.

Well, whilst it be true that there is misinformation on the web, in this case the first link found was the good one. What I really mean is that we should not have to provide you answers that you could (and should, in my opinion) have very easily found yourself. Do yourself a favor, read How To Ask Questions The Smart Way. Oh and about younger grasshopper: I just turned 68 today and am still eager to learn. Actually, more than ever before as I have less time left.

I honestly believe not all, but a lot of you Linux users have one track minds. You and others are suggesting I don't use nfs, while others use it successfully and have help me with it. Now if I chose samba, we would still have this same argument because others would suggest nfs or some other technique. No wonder people chose other OS. You guys are making this more of a headache, than what it needs to be. How about I do clean install, without using nfs, but samba instead, and we will still have the bickering and upset fanboys. Linux is complicated because of people like you. bass gave me instructions and guidance and gotten me further than some of you. A lot of you played a part, but a lot of you are just fkin annoying for no reason whatsoever.

Hello ! Here is "The Stalker",

Are you kidding again ? "Linux is complicated because of people like you" addressed to Didier ??? I think it's quite the opposite, Didier is one of the pillars in these forums and the Slackware ecosystem, he takes a lot of time to contribute and also answer beginners questions. And you, continuing your "I'm right, I know it all, I never do something bad, if you disagree or I didn't understand, go away, but PLEAAAAAAAAAAASSE I need help". Seriously.

I was happy to help you EVERYBODY was nice to you until... Until what ? Oh that's the mystery... I'm not sure you'll find why... In fact I'm pretty sure that you DON'T WANT to know, because you're a spoiled brat... With a child maybe, still a spoiled brat.

If Windows works for you, then this might be the best solution for you indeed.

Having heard everyone and now knowing what are your options, what prevents you to design your solution and implement it?

And this is why Slackware is number 1
http://fossforce.com/2017/01/best-li...-round-voting/

Where are all the cheerleaders at? It gonna take a hell of a lot to get rid of this PROBLEM!!!!!

I have mentioned both samba and nfs and gave instructions for both. Both have benefits and both have downsides. Now that you have it set up, you learned the basics and if you need it again in the future, hopefully you can remember what you did and get it working. I agree with others that in your current situation, samba may be a better fit for you, especially because it provides the ability to browse shares through network locations without needing to actually add those to your computer. This prevents you from running into the round robin situation you have with your current setup, and you don't need to manually add anything to the fstab.

Overall, I think it would be best to just cool down. People are on this forum to help out. There is some expectation that the people asking questions try their best to get answers and not just want to be spoon fed. I imagine the majority of us are adults (although, there are some smart youngsters out there using Slackware who don't fall under the "adult" bubble), so (hopefully) we've been able to get far in this life without being handed answers.

As I said on another thread that PROBLEMCHYLD vented on, we try our best to provide adequate help to people who request it. But we also like people to try things on their own and help work towards a solution. We do frequently say to "RTFM" or to google something, because others will have said it better than we probably could. Several of us have contributed to the Slackware wiki and we hope our articles are helpful, even to "n00bs". However, when you're knowledgeable in a subject, sometimes it's hard to take a step back and look at it from the perspective of someone who has never done anything like it. We still want those articles to be helpful, so try them out, and if you get stuck, let us know. We can help you work through that rough spot, and if we find that the article is lacking or not correct (software changes frequently and the articles may have been written based on older versions), we're willing to change it to make things easier for others.

However, when you come on a forum and ask a question, you should be grateful people are helping, even if they aren't necessarily providing you the answer you want. I don't think any one came here with the plan to blast you because of your lack of knowledge. Sometimes people provide constructive criticism, and it's up to you if you want to take it and try to change or take it and get angry at the person. I'll be the first to admit, receiving criticism can be difficult, but if you can try and see the situation from their perspective, you may see that they aren't trying to slam you, but to help you. I usually try to see the best in others. When I read something and it flips that switch that starts building frustration, I try to take a step back and see if what I initially thought is what was intended by the person.

Overall, I hope you can take people's suggestions without getting angry. I haven't really seen any sign of fanboyism here. Just people looking at your situation and providing suggestions. It's up to you to decide what suggestion to take. If you're really not sure what protocol to use (nfs or samba), googling can probably provide some idea of what each can provide. If you have further questions beyond that, we can provide additional insight. But, unless you're intending one computer to act as the nfs server and provide all the share folders to the other computers, I don't think nfs is the best option for you.

Sorry for the novel.

Don't be ! I admire you even more for this :).

Well since I have nfs already set up, I'll pursue it. I didn't spend all this time just to double back. I'll look into samba when I do clean installs in the future.

BratPit

I tried the commands, but it still did not mount on boot. I still had to manually mount them.

Hopefully, I can get a solution without the utter BS from the cheerleaders. This topic is only getting longer from fanboys trying to justify their so-called Linux competence.

We just had about 10 posts back to back, and not one was a solution. But I'm the noobie, oh, the irony.

Where is the ban button for this guy ? He never stop to insult people who helped him...

Dude you're such a lame egotic that you didn't even "Waste" your time to do a google for yourself. "Those" fanboys as you say, took time to write you answer with a lot of insight stuff..

Could you point towards a "so-called linux competence" in this thread (appart from your own posts of course) ? Please enlight us, you're so demanding for help, that you should SHARE help and enlight us and point where we were wrong...

I bet you'd tell Linus himself that he have a "so-called kernel competence" so dumb, uneducated and stupid you are proving yourself with this thread.

Well we got a DUNNING KRUGER ALERT again... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunnin...3Kruger_effect

Sorry guys, but I vote for a ban, I don't understand why we should tolerate this kind of behavior. The guy come to your house, drink all beers, shit all over the place, and insult people being "so-call owners"... That's just crazy.

And Sorry *Bassmadrigal*, couldn't avoid answering this never-ending "BS". But I'll follow your advice about cooling down now :).


Dunning-Kruger summary for those who can't google/wikipedia something because internet is full of frauds...
«The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive incapacity, on the part of those with low ability, to recognize their ineptitude and evaluate their competence accurately. Their research also suggests corollaries: high-ability individuals may underestimate their relative competence and may erroneously assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.»

And you sir, Mr Stalker will not stop. You have not contribute at all simpleton. Have you considered I have search you brain dead maniac. I started my endeavor before I posted or started the topic. On the link that was given, didn't work that's why I posted my issues. But you all on my sack. Get off me!!

I should be banned for making a generalized statement that doesn't apply to everyone?
Apparently the shoe fits you well.
There's that one track mind you constantly utilize.
I'm your worst nightmare.

Huston we have a situation!

Ok, since you said you are using Network Manager, that is likely your problem on why they aren't mounting on boot. Earlier, I posted some excerpts of /etc/rc.d/rc.S and /etc/rc.d/rc.M, which are the two major startup scripts for Slackware (rc.S is for single user mode, and rc.M continues once it switches to multiuser mode). The final mount command is run before Network Manager is started. That means that when the last mount command during startup is run, you aren't connected to your network yet.

For this, your best bet would probably be to add a hook to Network Manager to run mount when it's connected to the network. You can do that by adding a file to /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/ that it will run. It could contain something like:

Save it something like, mount-nfs.sh and then chmod it to 744.

I don't use NetworkManager at all, but I'm pretty sure this works. When Network Manager changes conditions, it will run all scripts in that directory with two arguments. The first is the interface name, which we're disregarding, and the second is the status. So, essentially, when something changes, Network Manager will run /etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/mount-nfs.sh wlan0 up as root. So, we write the script to say that when it sees the interface has connected (which is the up status), it will try to mount everything in /etc/fstab that is using nfs.

This will hopefully solve your problem.

As to using samba, your computers can do both. So, now that you have nfs working, if you decide you want to learn samba, you can then get that configured and running as well. You aren't stuck with either nfs or samba... you can do both :)

Impressive...

Thanks, bass

I'll give it a try later tonight or tomorrow. Thanks to the rest for your contributions.

https://xkcd.com/308/ -- I just had to tell my wife I couldn't go to bed yet because someone was wrong on the internet... unfortunately, it was me that was wrong ;)

Ok, so I made a mistake here. I referenced my 14.1 install, and with 14.2, Pat changed the location of the Network Manager startup in rc.M, so it does actually start it before the final mount command is run... However, I think for most users, Network Manager doesn't actually connect to a network until the GUI is started up (this is based on various reports on the forum, but as I stated earlier, I don't use Network Manager, so hopefully those reports were accurate), so even though the Network Manager daemon is started, it doesn't connect the the network until a user is logged in that has it configured to connect to that network.

Because of that, I believe the script I just posted is still likely what you need to connect your nfs shares when you are connected to the network. Hopefully it works :)

Forum user PROBLEMCHYLD honors his all-caps-nickname on a regular basis by systematically trolling discussions on LQ with his manifest anger management issues. He's already ruined the MLED forum with his erratic behavior, but even after I reported posts where, among other things, he suggested I should "kill myself" (sic) and he repeatedly threatened to "rip me a new one" (sic), LQ mods still thought it OK to give him a chance. As a result, we more or less abandoned the MLED forum and moved any further discussion to the mailing list, where the discussion is civil and trolls simply get banned.

Ok Nik... Wait he's being rewarded with a nice answer again...

Well today I will insult my colleagues, apparently this is the way to go so people will be nice at me, and everybody will shut up because "it's not their problem"... GREAT ! Today I learn how to abuse people without penalty ! YEAH !

Maybe some music will relax me... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFsHSHE-iJQ :).

everyone has problems, if you are going to let words keep you up all night long, especially knowing that the chances of someone in here or on the internet alone will and can actually figure out where you are to try and actually do what it was they may have said to another. what are the chances of that actually happening?

Anger is an emotional outlet, you have no idea what that other person is going through or has had to endure in their life time. Not that this is an excuse for ones behavior. They have no idea what you have gone through, or are going through.

BUT one has to keep in mind when ones emotions are in charge then their logic is no longer there. As much as they or others might think it is.


when emotions take over logic goes out the window.

a grain of salt too is part of a saying.

the abused child that cannot not fight back or he or she deflects his or hers anger towards others because they have to other outlet for it.

defense mechanisms based on primitive drives that man has no control over. not that one should use that for an excuse for their behavior, but for understanding of their behavior so hopefully they can get a grip on their lives. Which in some cases is not always as easy as it sounds.

the only thing one can really control is themselves.

Yes, but sometimes when the person being helped is completely rude and insulting to the people trying to help him, the choice will be to simply stop trying to help that person. Reputations can quickly take hold pretty quickly, and that person may find themselves being ignored in the future. So to the OP, I would recommend to try to be more grateful to the people freely donating their time to help you, even if you don't like their advice or it doesn't work for you. We are not all as patient as bassmadrigal. :)

And this actually a solution to the problem at hand. Then you guys say I'm trolling......It is not my fault MLED isn't as successful as you wanted it to be. You use outdated packages and claim everything is up to date. The MLED forum was a failure before I got here, and it will continue when I'm gone. So stop with the shenanigans.
The statements I made didn't apply to everyone in the topic, it applied to certain individuals. This is why everyone is not involved. But since you want to jump on the bandwagon, you can ride it pass the edge of the cliff with your cherry-picking boyfriends. You're trying to do what NoStressHQ failed at, trying to lump everyone in this topic in the static that you so-called boys and girls can't handle on your own. And yes, I was rude, but don't lie and make it seem like I have been rude to everyone. I was rude to specific people, not all. There's that one track mind again. Looking at the glass half full.

And? Did I say you were rude to everyone?

My previous comment to you was actually meant as a sincere piece of advice, not an insult, but you are offended very easily despite your macho-man type comments. Don't worry, I'll be ignoring you from now on.