this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)

Fedora Linux

2042 readers
1 users here now

All about Fedora Linux

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been trying for days and have been impossible.

All I get is not enough permission to access share from client

`testparm

Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf

Loaded services file OK.

Weak crypto is allowed by GnuTLS (e.g. NTLM as a compatibility fallback)

Server role: ROLE_STANDALONE

Press enter to see a dump of your service definitions

Global parameters

[global]

printcap name = cups

security = USER

usershare allow guests = Yes

usershare max shares = 100

workgroup = SAMBA

idmap config * : backend = tdb

cups options = raw

[homes]

browseable = No

comment = Home Directories

inherit acls = Yes

read only = No

valid users = %S %D%w%S

[printers]

browseable = No

comment = All Printers

create mask = 0600

path = /var/tmp

printable = Yes

[print$]

comment = Printer Drivers

create mask = 0664

directory mask = 0775

force group = @printadmin

path = /var/lib/samba/drivers

write list = @printadmin root

[Drive]

guest ok = Yes

path = /var/home/htpc/Drive

read only = No

valid users = htpc`

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sundaylab@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Have you created the samba password for your user?

Try

sudo smbpasswd -a username

[–] yumyumsmuncher@feddit.uk 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] sundaylab@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

What's the exact error that you get?

[–] that_leaflet@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I've never been able to get the "Sharing" thing working in Gnome. I think that's a Samba share.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don't know if these notes would help, but I believe you should be able to make this work in podman, rather than trying to muck about with the primary system files.

https://www.procustodibus.com/blog/2022/10/wireguard-in-podman/

It's about using wireguard, but I would imagine most of the concepts should be the same.

[–] trbeach@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

FWIW....

My 2 cents. I tried and tried to make samba work. Finally, I saw a post from someone that said, "samba is for windows, SSH is for Linux". Best post I ever read. SSH for me ever since.

The first thing I do after install is uninstall samba.

Happy days ever since.

[–] yumyumsmuncher@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

I gave up, ended up using SSH

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 3 days ago

I've never tried to set up Samba, so I think this is probably good advice

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This is the most convoluted use of basic services I've ever seen just to make Samba work 😂😂😂

Y'know, there's a MUCH simpler way to make this work by just using a regular distribution without these limitations.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What you call a limitation is a way to ensure uptime. Yes, it sometimes involves unique ways of solving problems, but that doesn't mean going with a traditional mutable system is the best option for people's needs.

I have Bazzite on a shared laptop, and knowing that the people who will use it won't have to worry about fucking up the system with a bad update is great peace of mind.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I run thousands of servers and have never had a "bad update" take a node down. Not since the 00's at least.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Lucky you? I can't say the same.

Regardless, OP didn't ask if they should just switch, they asked how to solve their problem. They can decide for themselves if they want to try to use containers or just install traditional Fedora.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Gave them an answer as well.