Topic: upgrading from W2KServer

[dwater]

Hi,

I am (attempting to) upgrading from W2KServer.

I made a backup of my w2k machine using Windows backup, and will (once I figure out how to recover the files from tape) try to recreate the shares on SME.

Unfortunately, I don't see any way to administer samba - swat isn't installed.

How should I make the shared filesystems available to users from SME? There must be a new way of doing it or something...

Max.

[mdo]

You create shares ("ibays"), users and groups through SMEserver's "server manager".

Regards,
Michael

[dwater]

You create shares ("ibays"), users and groups through SMEserver's "server manager".

Regards,
Michael

OK, thanks. I'll look into those more. My first attempt at using them in place of how we used 'shares' in W2K failed with the message :

"
The account "shared" is an existing account.
"

I am not sure what this means. I was not creating an account, just a shared directory structure called \\truth\shared. I also want \\truth\administration and "\\truth\it resources".

It is a bit confusing...what's going wrong?

Thanks very much for your help.

Max.

PS. BTW, I do shy away from changing how my users work too much, but they have just all "up"graded from W2KPRo to XPPro, so they are expecting change right now - so now is a good time, I suppose.

[mdo]

Max

SMEserver maintains share-, user-, group-, printer-names, etc. in it's internal accounts db.
With your name chosen ("shared"), you are trying to use a reserved share/account name. You might want to try to use something else (eg. shared_data).

BTW, I would avoid a space in a share name like "it resources" but that's more a personal preference.

Regards,
Michael

[dwater]

Max

SMEserver maintains share-, user-, group-, printer-names, etc. in it's internal accounts db.
With your name chosen ("shared"), you are trying to use a reserved share/account name. You might want to try to use something else (eg. shared_data).

"Reserved" eh? Hrm. I wonder what it is reserved for. I can only imagine it being used for what I want it to be used for.

Anyway, I guess I could try shared_data or shared_files. They're a bit longer, but all the people using this are doing so from Windows XP Pro, so they'll just be clicking and it doesn't matter how long the name is. Perhaps I might prefer something like 'public'. Hrm.

BTW, I would avoid a space in a share name like "it resources" but that's more a personal preference.

Yes, I agree. I'm not a Windows person - from the SGI IRIX world. Files with spaces in have caused me no end of trouble - with scripts and command pipes like 'find ... -print0 | xargs -0 ... | ...'. I would have replaced the space with a '-' or '_' before creating it

Max.

[dwater]

...I guess I could try shared_data or shared_files. They're a bit longer, but all the people using this are doing so from Windows XP Pro, so they'll just be clicking and it doesn't matter how long the name is. Perhaps I might prefer something like 'public'. Hrm.

Hrmph. 'public' is also 'reserved'. I can't help but wonder why. It's really annoying.

Also very annoying is the limit on name length. On the W2K server I am porting from, we had one called 'administration', but SME says that is too long!

I guess I'll have to use 'admin' then - not a big deal, I suppose, but it doesn't create a good imporession for someone evaluating a move to SME from W2K.

Max.

[dwater]

...I guess I'll have to use 'admin' then...

Aargggh!

You guessed it. Admin is, of course, reserved (

Admin-files it is. Looks awefully messy, but there's no waya round it.

Max.

[RobRoye]

Keep in mind that in XP you can rename how the share appears. Even if you name it "beer" on the server, you can make a Network Place named "Administration Files" that points to it. That way only you really need to know the naming convention you use.