Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 75623

Summary: nautilus unable to access smb: shares
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Pavel <pavelr>
Component: gnome-vfs2-extrasAssignee: Havoc Pennington <hp>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Jay Turner <jturner>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 8.0CC: srevivo, ted
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2002-10-11 19:12:32 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Pavel 2002-10-10 12:51:35 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021009

Description of problem:
I'm trying to use nautilus to browse windows shares. When I type 'smb:' in
location bar, nautilus displays list of computers, after double-click on the
computer it asks username/password and displays shares available on the
computer. But after double-clicking the share name nautilus pops up dialog,
saying 'You don't have permissions to see "sharename"'. Security log on the
windows computer shows (successful) logon of the provided user, then logoff of
the user, then (unsuccessful) attempt to log on as GUEST (disabled). It happens
with both NT and Win2k machines. I tried to authenticate as either 'DOMAIN\user'
or as 'user'. Linux box is not member of the domain. Also, I'm able to browse
SMB shares on other linux computers.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Try to browse smb: with nautilus.
	

Actual Results:  Unable to display content of shared folders.

Expected Results:  Display content of the folders

Additional info:

Comment 1 Havoc Pennington 2002-10-10 15:17:39 UTC
Try disabling your firewall, "service ipchains stop"

If that fixes it, you need to use redhat-config-securitylevel or 
manual editing to punch your firewall for smb support.

Comment 2 Pavel 2002-10-10 15:23:54 UTC
I never enabled the firewall (I checked again now - it is disabled). Also, I
have no problems to connect to any computer with smbclient. Other computers can
browse shares on this machine, too.

Comment 3 Thomas Dodd 2002-10-11 19:12:26 UTC
I have the same problems. Several hosts on the network, all using
a Samba machine as PDC and domain logins. The main server and PDC
is running samba-2.2.5 on a Solaris8 machine, I have 2.2.5-10 from
psyche on a PC. There are severl Windoze machines, Win95, 98, and
XP all on the network. All windows machines can browse all shares
fine. nautilus cannot show the shares on any machine with smb:
protocol. It does show domains, and machines in the domains correctly,
but all machines have no shares.

The Red Hat build of samba doesn't leave anyinfo in the logs, but the
Solaris machine does. When trying to access a share on it, I see this
in the per-machine log:

[2002/10/11 14:04:10, 0] smbd/password.c:domain_client_validate(1549)
  domain_client_validate: could not fetch trust account password for domain CSDC
[2002/10/11 14:04:21, 0] smbd/password.c:domain_client_validate(1549)
  domain_client_validate: could not fetch trust account password for domain CSDC

These occur for smb:/// and smb://csdc (the workgroup/domain name)
I get nothing when accessing the machine. I also tried the method from the
vfs2-extras docs, smb://user:pass@server/share and no go (no log message
either). I also tries @WG/server/share and @WG/server with the same results.



Comment 4 Alexander Larsson 2002-11-06 08:19:49 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 76253 ***