English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Support > support.Apps

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 27 February 2017, 19:58   #1
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
smbfs problems any ideas?

Hi

I am trying to share a pc's directory on my amiga 1200 using smbfs an smbmounter.

I have installed the files, set an assign (assign samba c:samba) and shared the directory on the pc via a homegroup.

I can ping the pc's ip address but not its name (does dns work like that?)

However when I setup smbmounter as follows -

Name: pc
Workgroup: homegroup
Hostname: pc
Service: backup
Username and password blank, prompt for login box ticked
Volume: pc

And try to connect I get error unknown host pc

If i edit the settings for the connection andclick the questionmark next to the host name i get error connection failed to host and then the pcs ip address

Any ideas?

Thanks in advance
chocsplease is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 27 February 2017, 20:30   #2
spudje
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 806
Have you tried using the PC's IP address as hostname? Named hostnames only work if you have a host file (no idea where to put that on an Amiga) or an internal DNS/netbios server.
spudje is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 10:39   #3
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
You need to have the hostname "pc" defined in your hosts file. This is done differently depending on your TCP/IP stack, but if you're using Miami or Genesis, there's a section in the preferences for adding hostnames, which is what you're looking for. The PC will need to have a static IP address for this to work properly - this can be done using your router to reserve an IP address for the PC, or by setting it manually in the PC's network settings.

Once a hostname is set, you should be able to ping it and SMBFS/SMBMounter should work as expected.

Using just the IP address doesn't always work properly with SMBFS for some reason.
Daedalus is online now  
Old 28 February 2017, 11:12   #4
apex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Amigaplanet
Posts: 357
Latest SMBFS is buggy, use 1.76.
apex is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 11:30   #5
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
There are some issues with the later versions, yes, but also bear in mind that the older versions of SMBFS do not work with shares on Windows Vista and later versions of Windows.
Daedalus is online now  
Old 28 February 2017, 12:19   #6
liviux76
Registered User

liviux76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: BO/Italy
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by apex View Post
Latest SMBFS is buggy, use 1.76.
Where did you find the 1.76 version?

Here I can see just version 1.74, and then, version 1.102 (and both, unfortunately, give me problems when writing in my shares, a D-Link NAS and a Samba share on Linux).
liviux76 is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 12:21   #7
apex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Amigaplanet
Posts: 357
Sorry, 1.74. Forget 1.102.
apex is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 12:36   #8
jPV
Registered User
jPV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: RNO
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
You need to have the hostname "pc" defined in your hosts file. This is done differently depending on your TCP/IP stack, but if you're using Miami or Genesis, there's a section in the preferences for adding hostnames, which is what you're looking for.
AmiTCP based packages have it in amitcp:db/hosts file, that can be edited directly without using GUIs too. Roadshow probably has it in Devs:Internet/hosts.
jPV is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 14:48   #9
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
Hi

Many thanks for the replies. It works! I can now share, not only my pc's back-up drive but also its dvd player. At last access to all my CU amiga and AF cds.

I have one problem though. When I open a share that is larger than 4 gb workbench only says its 4gb max. Im runing os 3.1 workbench v40.42 and kickstart 40.68.

Is this a kickstart/setpatch issue, a problem with crossdos (or don't pc shares use this) or a problem with smbfs?

Hope someone can help, oh Im using the latest smbfs.

Hope someone can help
chocsplease is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 15:44   #10
nogginthenog
Amigan

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: London
Posts: 605
What's wrong with 1.102?

I think I've seen some corruption in the past but it's very intermittent (and I wasn't 100% sure it was smbfs).

By the way, I just noticed that there is a 1.111 (11 May 2016):
https://github.com/obarthel/amiga-smbfs/releases
nogginthenog is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 17:08   #11
liviux76
Registered User

liviux76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: BO/Italy
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by nogginthenog View Post
What's wrong with 1.102?

I think I've seen some corruption in the past but it's very intermittent (and I wasn't 100% sure it was smbfs).

By the way, I just noticed that there is a 1.111 (11 May 2016):
https://github.com/obarthel/amiga-smbfs/releases
Hi, thanks for pointing that version out to me, I'll certainly try it as soon as possible.

In my case, with both, 1.74 and 1.102 versions, I can read and copy everything from my Samba shares but I am not able to write anything on them.

To be more precise, if I try to copy, for example, a small txt file or an adf to one of my shares, the copy seems to start but after a second or two everything hangs ("Intuition" doesn't refresh anymore the windows on my desktop).

I am still able to move the mouse pointer and to write commands in a shell so, if I kill (break) the smb process, it ends and everything works again.

In a few cases, breaking the process have left the file I was copying in the share in a consistent state (especially if it was a small txt file), so it seems to me that the copy starts but the process isn't handled correctly.

Sorry if I am a bit OT, hopefully the OP won't face the same issues!
liviux76 is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 17:59   #12
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocsplease View Post
I have one problem though. When I open a share that is larger than 4 gb workbench only says its 4gb max. Im runing os 3.1 workbench v40.42 and kickstart 40.68.

Is this a kickstart/setpatch issue, a problem with crossdos (or don't pc shares use this) or a problem with smbfs?

Hope someone can help, oh Im using the latest smbfs.

Hope someone can help
Do you mean the free space shown in the Workbench window title? If so, then it's a Workbench issue, but it's not really a big deal since the actual shared drive should work fine regardless of the size reported. Smbfs doesn't use CrossDOS or anything, it handles all the higher level commands from the OS itself.
Daedalus is online now  
Old 28 February 2017, 22:04   #13
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
Do you mean the free space shown in the Workbench window title? If so, then it's a Workbench issue, but it's not really a big deal since the actual shared drive should work fine regardless of the size reported. Smbfs doesn't use CrossDOS or anything, it handles all the higher level commands from the OS itself.
Yes, sorry I wasn't clear, the free space reported on the window.
I was worried I might suffer overflow issues if I copied past the 4 gb boundery, where files just start again from the start of the disk overwriting everything. Least I think thats what happens....

Anyway is it fixable? It would just be nice to have the correct values. I have cds of os 3.5 and 3.9, but cant install them as my wb partion isnt large enough. Would copying the workbench library from one of those fix the issue, or am I heading into guru terratory doing this?

So far I havent had the problems reported by liviux.
chocsplease is offline  
Old 28 February 2017, 22:52   #14
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
Hmmm, I've never tried partially installing components of 3.9 like that, but I suspect it might lead to issue alright. Easy enough to try though...

However, while the actual amount free and used are correctly displayed under 3.9, the % full is not (Grab from my mounted NAS under OS 3.9)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Grabbed_345x303x24.png
Views:	48
Size:	82.8 KB
ID:	52281  
Daedalus is online now  
Old 01 March 2017, 02:24   #15
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
Hmmm, I've never tried partially installing components of 3.9 like that, but I suspect it might lead to issue alright. Easy enough to try though...

However, while the actual amount free and used are correctly displayed under 3.9, the % full is not (Grab from my mounted NAS under OS 3.9)
Oh well it was a thought. Wonder where wb 3.9 is getting that number from? Its not even close to the percentage full (56ish). I think I trawl through aminet, might find a patch or something.

Many thanks for checking.
chocsplease is offline  
Old 01 March 2017, 09:55   #16
apex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Amigaplanet
Posts: 357
Maybe this help:
https://sambaforamigaos.wordpress.com
apex is offline  
Old 01 March 2017, 11:28   #17
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocsplease View Post
Oh well it was a thought. Wonder where wb 3.9 is getting that number from? Its not even close to the percentage full (56ish). I think I trawl through aminet, might find a patch or something.

Many thanks for checking.
Yeah, it appears to be some sort of overflow. The actual values for free and in use are correct, but the percentage is probably still calculated in 32 bits. I've occasionally seen it give a negative percentage too!

I vaguely recall there being patches available for 3.1, hopefully you can dig something up.
Daedalus is online now  
Old 01 March 2017, 20:39   #18
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
Yeah, it appears to be some sort of overflow. The actual values for free and in use are correct, but the percentage is probably still calculated in 32 bits. I've occasionally seen it give a negative percentage too!
Why do programmers keep using signed variables for values that can't ever be negative!!?? It halves the value they can store for starters. I used to work in IT and the number of heads I wanted to bang together over this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
I vaguely recall there being patches available for 3.1, hopefully you can dig something up.
Sadly my trawl through Aminet has so far turned up an empty net, though I have only worked through anything mentioning Workbench - then I'm not sure where else to look, it's a big archive.

I have a copy of Amiga Forever whch has installs of Amisys and AmiKit, which is where this gets a bit odd. Amikit has Workbench version 45.131 and this reports a 16gb flash drive as 4gb. Amisys has workbench version 45.127 and this reports the same 16gb drive as ... 8gb. All on Amiga Forever running on a 64 bit pc. Go figure...

Wonder where those updates could be? Looks like next stop is those cds I have. Anyone any ideas where I should start looking?

Later editions I guess, Prob Amiga Active ones, but thats all I can think of at present.

Last edited by chocsplease; 01 March 2017 at 21:28.
chocsplease is offline  
Old 01 March 2017, 21:26   #19
chocsplease
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: london
Posts: 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by apex View Post
Thanks for the suggestion, I actually started looking here before posting. It's a good tutorial, but the Samba links are dead. Luckily smbfs does not need the base files - not sure if it needs the bin ones, but I got those from Aminet just in case.

I'm not sure that the Aminet Samba bin archive is complete though.
chocsplease is offline  
Old 02 March 2017, 10:21   #20
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 3,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocsplease View Post
Why do programmers keep using signed variables for values that can't ever be negative!!?? It halves the value they can store for starters. I used to work in IT and the number of heads I wanted to bang together over this...
Indeed, though signed or unsigned the result will still be wrong when you're using 32-bit arithmetic. I guess a signed long is reasonable enough for a value that in theory is only ever between 0 and 100, but it should be a long-long if it's the result of a 64-bit calculation.

Quote:
Sadly my trawl through Aminet has so far turned up an empty net, though I have only worked through anything mentioning Workbench - then I'm not sure where else to look, it's a big archive.
Hmmm, I'm having a look now but can't find anything either. I'm sure there was one when I first came across this problem 15+ years ago, but maybe I'm mistaken. I'll see what I can find elsewhere anyway.

Quote:
I have a copy of Amiga Forever whch has installs of Amisys and AmiKit, which is where this gets a bit odd. Amikit has Workbench version 45.131 and this reports a 16gb flash drive as 4gb. Amisys has workbench version 45.127 and this reports the same 16gb drive as ... 8gb. All on Amiga Forever running on a 64 bit pc. Go figure...
Are they showing the drive or the partitions at those sizes? If it's the drive and not the partitions, that's to do with the scsi.device patches (or lack thereof) that they're using rather than the filesystem or Workbench's space calculations. It's got nothing to do with the host system anyway.

Quote:
Wonder where those updates could be? Looks like next stop is those cds I have. Anyone any ideas where I should start looking?

Later editions I guess, Prob Amiga Active ones, but thats all I can think of at present.
I can't imagine there's much on them patch-wise that you can't find on Aminet.

Quote:
Luckily smbfs does not need the base files - not sure if it needs the bin ones, but I got those from Aminet just in case.

I'm not sure that the Aminet Samba bin archive is complete though.
Nope, smbfs is stand-alone so it doesn't need any of the Samba bin files. SMBMounter can use a couple of the bins (smbclient and nmblookup specifically) for browsing the network, but doesn't need them for the actual connection if you configure it manually.
Daedalus is online now  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Updated SMBFS Now Available for OS3 and OS4 Daedalus News 19 23 August 2017 12:56
How to use SMBFS @UAE support.Apps 18 08 February 2016 09:42
WHDLoad preload over smbfs, then kill tcp/ip? wXR project.WHDLoad 4 08 January 2016 14:17
Help with SMBFS? madman support.Apps 1 14 August 2011 19:32
SMBFS And Windows VIsta @UAE support.Apps 11 12 April 2011 20:41

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 17:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.08980 seconds with 14 queries