[SOLVED] Samba 4.x backwards compatibility with Samba 3.x?

kikinovak · 09-23-2013, 03:43 AM

Hi,

I have a question for those of you who are already familiar with Samba 4.x. I understand this new major release comes with many changes under the hood. Now I wonder if I can still configure it as simply as 3.x. Here's a real-life example of what I consider a "simple" configuration, the one running on my office server (nestor), with two different shares, one public, one confidential (e. g. needing authentication):

Code:

# /etc/samba/smb.conf

[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
domain master = yes
netbios name = NESTOR
server string = Serveur de fichiers et d'impression NESTOR
dns proxy = yes
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 1000
syslog = 0
bind interfaces only = yes
interfaces = 192.168.2.0/24 localhost
hosts allow = 192.168.2. 127.
security = user
passdb backend = tdbsam
unix password sync = no
invalid users = root
encrypt passwords = yes
guest account = smbguest
map to guest = bad user
force group = users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770

[Public]
path = /srv/samba/public
comment = Partage Public
public = yes
only guest = yes
read only = no

[Confidentiel]
path = /srv/samba/confidentiel
comment = Partage Confidentiel
read only = no
invalid users = root nobody smbguest

[printers]
comment = Imprimantes
browseable = no
path = /var/spool/samba
public = yes
read only = yes
printable = yes

Will I be able to use this configuration "as is" on Samba 4.x? Or did the overall syntax change?

Cheers,

Niki

phenixia2003 · 09-23-2013, 04:13 AM

Hello,

There's a wiki about features/changes in samba 4.0 here. You will find a list of changes in smb.conf in this section.

Hope this helps.

--
SeB

ponce · 09-23-2013, 04:26 AM

if it can be useful, here is how I'm using it at home (private network, no auth)

Code:

[global]
   workgroup = BAR_CIVILI
   server string = Samba Server
   security = user
   hosts allow = (ips of the allowe hosts)
   load printers = no
   log file = /var/log/samba.%m
   max log size = 50
   socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_RCVBUF=65535 SO_SNDBUF=65535 SO_KEEPALIVE
   map to guest = Bad User
   guest account = myuser
   dns proxy = no 
[ro]
   comment = read only space
   path = /path/to/read-only/folder
   read only = yes
   writable = no
   public = yes
   guest ok = yes
   force user = myuser
[rw]
   comment = read and write space
   path = /path/to/read-and-write/folder
   read only = no
   writable = yes
   public = yes
   guest ok = yes
   force user = myuser

files/folders are owned by myuser

kikinovak · 09-23-2013, 10:45 AM

Thanks guys. So globally I guess this looks like a YES.