Hello akonstam, Wednesday, February 9, 2005, 3:50:19 PM, you wrote: > On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 02:12:12AM -0600, David Hoffman wrote: >> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:23:44 +0100, Roger Grosswiler <roger@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxx schrieb: >> > > >> > > Well here is the deal. The managers of the system put users, faculty, >> > > etc. in different subdirectories. When I use the first smbmount I >> > > mount not the directory of csldap1 but the directory of all the >> > > home directories of users of the system. I might be able to live with >> > > that but it is annoying. Not to make a value judgement but MAC OS X >> > > allows you to mount using the share: //trinity-tigers/users/csldap1 >> > > to mount only the home directory of csldap1. >> > i see 2 problems here: >> > a) we are not using mac os x >> > b) i can deal with userdirectories without mounting the main-share for >> > all, if i put in my /etc/smb.conf the following for my user-shares: >> > >> > [homes] >> > comment = Home Directories >> > path = /users/%U >> > guest ok = no >> > browseable = yes >> > writable = yes >> > create mask = 775 >> > >> > i have all my userdirs in a directory called users. I share all the >> > homes with the %U afterwards, so if i user loggs in, the %U gets >> > replaced by its user name - voil?, this works. Putting browseable=no >> > hides the /users-share too. Still not perfect (would like to load a >> > server-side-login-batch on linux too..) but even more elegant than >> > having all shares seen by everybody. >> > >> > HTH >> > Roger >> > >> > >> >> Roger, I think you have it backwards. He is not trying to share user >> directories on his FC3 machine. He is trying to mount shares on a >> Windows machine to his FC3 machine. >> >> So the user shares are on the windows machine and he wants to connect >> to the windows shares with Fedora. >> >> It's not a question of setting up Samba, as that would provide shares >> from Fedora TO windows. >> > You are absolutely correct in your analysis of what I want to do. So > can it be done? > I recently received a clarification from out Windows people that the > share is really //trinity-tigers/users so technically smbmount is > doing what it is advertised to do but Windows 2000 and XP allow you to > mount one level below the share. I am getting the feeling that > smbmount will not. > -- Smbmount will not, AFAIK. However what would prevent you from mounting this share to some directory, say /mnt/trinity_users and then manage subdirectories giving the each user access to the proper one and placing symlinks into their home folders? Regards, Maxim.
