Has anyone run into this problem with Samba?

Lincoln Peters lincoln_peters at hotmail.com
Sat May 26 17:48:13 PDT 2001


All right, I've compressed the log using bzip2 and attached it to this 
message.  If this doesn't fit (now it's only about 1Kb), I don't know _what_ 
will.  It seems rather odd to me, though, because the original attached log 
was only about 3Kb.

I'm pretty sure that inted has nothing to do with Samba on my system.  And I 
did not see anything about "Bind interfaces only" in smb.conf.  However, I 
do have two network interfaces that I want to have Samba listen to (eth0 and 
vmnet1, for my LAN and for VMWare, respectively).  Both of them are listed 
in smb.conf, though, and I know that the interfaces themselves work fine.  
However, I am as baffled as ever.  And, according to 'rpm --query', there is 
only one copy of Samba on the computer.


>From: ME <dugan at passwall.com>
>Reply-To: <talk at nblug.org>
>To: talk at nblug.org
>Subject: Re: Has anyone run into this problem with Samba?
>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Sat, 26 May 2001, Lincoln Peters wrote:
> > Anyway, I now have a problem with Samba that is new since I upgraded to 
>Red
> > Hat 7.1, but I had not noticed it until now:
> > When I start Samba, smb immediately dies without any warning.  I tried
> > running testparm, and everything came out OK.  Thinking that it might be 
>a
> > program error, I tried installing the samba RPM that ships with 
>Mandrake,
> > and it experienced the same problem.
>
>Some things you may have checked, but are worth mentioning:
>Was smbd previously started from inetd or was it daemonized? If it was
>started from inetd, is it running when you are trying to start a
>daemonized copy?
>
>Look over options like "Bind interfaces only" and then see that you
>actually specified interfaces if you do set "bind interfaces only".
>
> > Finally, I tried running 'smbd -d 10' at the command prompt and read 
>through
> > the log file.  I have attached that log to this message.  The only part 
>I
> > could make sense of was that it tried to bind to the IP address 0.0.0.0,
> > which was apparently already in use, and then it shut itself down.  So I
> > pinged 0.0.0.0, and each ping was returned by 127.0.0.1 (my computer).
>
>I did not see your log file attached. There may be a size limit on the
>list. I can take a look at it and see if anything stands out to me. You
>can send me a copy directly if you want - can't guarantee much.
>
>"Already in use" suggests something else is listening on that port. Check
>out a new copy of "lsof" and compile (if necessary) for your kernel. If
>there is a package that comes with yout stock kernel, then install that
>lsof. (lsof is rather kernel dependend.) You can use it to find out what
>PID is locking control to service a particular port. (Though its primary
>role/job is listing open files (LiSt OpenFiles). This may help you to
>verify nothing else has bound to the ports used by smbd or nmbd.
>
>If you are feeling more ambitious, you can check to see if you have
>multiple copies of samba installed in different trees. Perhaps a script
>for starting a daemonized copy is referencing a different smbd than the
>one that is first in your search PATH for binaries. If you have different
>copies, or one copy is being started with an explicit "new" smb.conf file,
>you can try using strace and | through grep for ".conf" to see what .conf
>file it actually opens. (smbd -d 10 should also have told you what file it
>opened, and is more likely to give you more useful information.) The
>reason I suggest this is you testparm application may have an earlier
>location in your search path than the actual samba installation being
>called explicitly as a daemonized service or in (x)inetd.
>
> > Anyone know what this means and/or how to fix it?
>
>If this proves fruitless, there are a few samba mailing lists that can be
>found off their web site
>http://us1.samba.org/samba/support/
>
>Thanks,
>-ME
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


More information about the talk mailing list