lameSMBxplorer v0.2.2 beta

Under development: PCMCIA, wireless, etc.
Message
Author
ejb
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed 23 Sep 2009, 22:58

NASLITE problem

#91 Post by ejb »

Patriot,

Thanks for the reply. I did some additional digging into the naslite logs
last night. I think my problem relates to the old version of naslite I was using.
I downloaded the current version, installed it and everything is now working
perfectly.

Sorry for the fire drill. Thanks for a great tool.

moonguard12
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu 25 Mar 2010, 14:37

lameSMBxplorer-0.2.1b.pet

#92 Post by moonguard12 »

This is working on eeepc 700 with Lighthouse connecting to local network Vista Public share, no user no pwd. Pnethood was not seeing the share. Thank you.

User avatar
toomuchcomputertime
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri 18 Apr 2008, 17:58
Location: /usr/local/lib/X11/pixmaps/Cleveland\ OH\ USA.png

#93 Post by toomuchcomputertime »

This looks very interesting, did I miss the download link? Where can I download the latest version? I saw the alpha in an earlier post, but you are talking about a beta version?

Thanks.

User avatar
Patriot
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu 15 Jan 2009, 19:04

#94 Post by Patriot »

Hmmm .....
toomuchcomputertime wrote:This looks very interesting, did I miss the download link? .....
It's on the first page of this thread, just scroll down a little bit more for v0.2.1 beta (combined pet of lameSMBxplorer and lameSMBqmount). Can't miss it ... Kindly let me know how it goes ...

Also my thanks goes to everyone who has provided all the recent feedbacks ...


Rgds

User avatar
toomuchcomputertime
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri 18 Apr 2008, 17:58
Location: /usr/local/lib/X11/pixmaps/Cleveland\ OH\ USA.png

#95 Post by toomuchcomputertime »

Thanks, I have downloaded the most recent version. Pnethood has not been working for me. I used to use Linethood (I think) but that has not been working either.

Thanks

User avatar
technosaurus
Posts: 4853
Joined: Mon 19 May 2008, 01:24
Location: Blue Springs, MO
Contact:

#96 Post by technosaurus »

I recompiled the main samba binaries (3.0.37) and cut the size about in half, but don't have a way to test them at the moment

... just expand the tarball in the /opt/samba/bin directory (if for some reason it doesn't work just get the originals from /initrd/pup_ro2/opt/samba/bin)
Check out my [url=https://github.com/technosaurus]github repositories[/url]. I may eventually get around to updating my [url=http://bashismal.blogspot.com]blogspot[/url].

Firewave
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed 19 May 2010, 15:54

#97 Post by Firewave »

I ran into a few issues with lameSMBqmount on Quirky:
- trying to mount the root share (equivalent to \\machinename in Windows) using "/" isn't working (I had this working with another Linux system at a time)
- you cannot remove that non-working "/" entry from the list of shares
- when you loose your network connection it will start to hang in a loop it seems and eats up CPU until you fix your network connection. It also prevents the shutdown of the machine (share set on automount)

gcmartin

Using SAMBA in Puppy and Derivatives

#98 Post by gcmartin »

@Firewave, Just saw your request and though i'd offer a simple explanation.

Currently, you CANNOT create and share a folder or a file from Puppy ton any Windows machines using Microsoft/IBM CIFS technology (that what SAMBA does) because Samba appears to have been inadvertently broken in a prior release.

This is one of the drawbacks with Puppy on a LAN network that also has Windows machines.

It is my understanding that this will be addressed as soon as the current version 5 products are upgraded over the next month or 2..

Once this is done, Puppies will have FULL functionality comparable to and beyond any Windows desktop.

This post, by me, to help you, is NOT to be construed as an official statement...but, from a couple of sources, this is my understanding.

I, too, am waiting for an upcoming release that does NOT contain the current crippled version of SAMBA (that instead, has the fully working version of SAMBA that has not had its guts ripped out),so that I can begin work in this area to build a "howto" document for those who want to share information from Puppy with the LAN users including Windows as well as Linux LAN users.

disciple
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sun 21 May 2006, 01:46
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#99 Post by disciple »

gcmartin - are you sure Firewave's problem has anything to do with yours? It sounds like their problem is specifically with mounting a particular samba share from Puppy using lameSMBqmount, whereas your problem is with sharing folders in the first place (although I'm not even sure from your description whether your problem is only with Windows clients, or with Linux ones as well).

Anyway:
gcmartin wrote:Currently...
What is currently?
The latest version of uPup?
The latest version of Quirky? (N.B. Firewave is using an unspecified version of Quirky)
Which previous versions?
Samba appears to have been inadvertently broken in a prior release
In what way is it broken? Presumably you have a link to somewhere this is explained? It must be fixable (maybe simply by installing a working samba server package instead of whatever one you installed... which I guess was from the package manager?)
Do you know a good gtkdialog program? Please post a link here

Classic Puppy quotes

ROOT FOREVER
GTK2 FOREVER

disciple
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sun 21 May 2006, 01:46
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#100 Post by disciple »

Firewave wrote:- trying to mount the root share (equivalent to \\machinename in Windows)
I think you might be confused... you've confused me, anyway. In Windows you need to share particular drives or folders - since when was there a share that was just \\machinename?
Are you sure you didn't just have a filer that browsed Samba shares in the same way as windows? (i.e. a filer that shows you the computers on the network, and you can click on a computer to see its shares and click on a share to automatically mount it. This does not mean that a computer was shared as \\machinename - it just means that the functionality of a program like LameSMBxplorer was built into the filer.
Do you know a good gtkdialog program? Please post a link here

Classic Puppy quotes

ROOT FOREVER
GTK2 FOREVER

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#101 Post by rcrsn51 »

@gcmartin: While you are waiting, perhaps you should test the samba server package that BarryK built for you. It's here.

User avatar
Patriot
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu 15 Jan 2009, 19:04

#102 Post by Patriot »

Hmmm .....
gcmartin wrote:........ because Samba appears to have been inadvertently broken in a prior release. ........
I believe a quick correction to the statement is in order here ... As far as I'm aware of and the way I understand it, the samba packages on puppy 4 series were split into two packages, i) the samba client package ii) the full samba server package.

The samba client package comes standard with any existing recent puppy to keep down the iso size and the full samba package is available for separate installs for those who needs it. This allows browse/access to windows shares as a standard while samba file sharing remains as an installable option. I believe BarryK opted for this and I can understand why it was done this way.

However, to say that samba is "inadvertently" broken as in "utterly not working" is incorrect. It is actually "broken" into separate packages for different requirements.

FYI, the size of the full samba server package is roughly 20MB compressed pet (valid for samba v3.0 series) while recent samba v3.5 server packages already exceeds 30MB compressed. In contrast, the samba client package is under 2MB compressed which is a viable option for inclusion to the iso.

lameSMBxplorer was designed (with ideas liberally taken from pnethood) and is currently positioned to allow quick GUI based access to windows shares (using the least resistance path :wink: ) ... I hope to be able to continue improving lameSMBxplorer as soon as time permits ...

BTW, Firewave's situation could probably be a parsing oversight in SMBqmount. I will need more information on exactly what he/she is trying to achieve there.


Rgds

User avatar
Geoffrey
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 08:42
Location: Queensland

#103 Post by Geoffrey »

Having a problem with lameSMBxplorer v0.2.1 beta browser in gray's Quirky NOP 1.2, it don't seem to scan long enough to find anything no matter what I do, the quick connect works fine if I tell it the connections, I ran it from terminal to see if that would give me some clue as to what was happening, here is the result.

# lameSMBxplorer
ScanNBT:
ScanNBT: 127.0.0.1|<unknown>||<unknown>|
127.0.0.2|<unknown>||<unknown>|
127.0.0.3|<unknown>||<unknown>|
127.0.0.4|<unknown>||<unknown>|

and the list goes on, finds nothing, my network is setup to use ip addresses in 10.1.1.1 - 255 range subnet of 255.0.0.0, is there anything I can change that will get it to work :?: Pnethood use to work ok if the scan time was set to 3, any less it would fail to find anything, any help would be appreciated.

User avatar
Patriot
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu 15 Jan 2009, 19:04

released: lameSMBqmount v0.2.2 beta

#104 Post by Patriot »

Hmmm .....

This bugfix release corrects a couple of issues with the network address parser.

changelog for lameSMBxplorer v0.2.2 beta:
- bugfix (lameSMBxplorer): properly exclude localhost IP address
- bugfix (lameSMBxplorer): correctly assign private netmask classing (A/B/C)


The above logic errors was discovered based on the bug report posted by Geoffrey.

@Geoffrey,
Kindly test the latest beta and let me know how it goes.


Rgds

User avatar
Geoffrey
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 08:42
Location: Queensland

#105 Post by Geoffrey »

Patriot,
Still no luck, I ran it from the terminal but this showed no output at all this time, the scan run for about 2 seconds then brings up the GUI which finds nothing, this seems quick to me, tried this on two pc's running Quirky NOP 1.2, both the same result, pnethood always took some time to find connections which are all static ip address's on all pc's and nas, is there a way to make it scan the network for a longer period the same as pnethood does.

lameSMBqmount still works fine, mounts all the shares instantly, is there anything else I can do that will give a indication of what is happening to help sort out this problem.

Geoffrey

User avatar
Patriot
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu 15 Jan 2009, 19:04

#106 Post by Patriot »

Hmmm .....

Bummer ... I think nbtscan's timeout is too fast. I'd need your help to diagnose this (in a terminal):

First, check your routes to confirm they're correct:

Code: Select all

# route -n
Next, do some manual scan tests for your samba/windows shares:

Code: Select all

# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.0.0.0/8
# nbtscan -t 5000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/16
# nbtscan -t 2000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
You may need to adjust/tinker with the timeout -t {value} to see how nbtscan cope with your subnet. The default is 1000ms. The nbtscan is a critical function. If it doesn't find anything here, no shares wil be shown either. Also, try adjusting your subnet (like above examples) to see which one works better (or at all).

I have a timing code drawn up based on subnet class but I'd like to know the min/max results for the manual scans above.


Rgds

User avatar
Geoffrey
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 08:42
Location: Queensland

#107 Post by Geoffrey »

Patriot,
Here are the results:

Code: Select all

# route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
10.0.0.0        0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 eth0
0.0.0.0         10.1.1.1        0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0
# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.0.0.0/8
# 
# 
# nbtscan -t 5000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/16 
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC      |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2
# 
# 
# nbtscan -t 2000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC      |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2
nbtscan -t 5000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/16 this is hit and miss don't always find the wireless windows7 laptops, any less than 3000 don't find anything at all

the nbtscan -t 2000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24 gives the best result, I changed the -t 1000, 500, 250, 125

Code: Select all

nbtscan -t 1000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC      |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2
# 
# 
# nbtscan -t 500 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC      |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2
# 
# 
# nbtscan -t 250 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC      |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2
# 
# 
# nbtscan -t 125 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC        |<server>|REPOTEC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC        |<server>|PUPPYPC        |00-00-00-00-00-00
set -t 125 the windows7 laptop drops out, the 10.1.1.0/24 seems to be more of the deciding factor regardless of time.

hope this is of some help to you

Geoffrey

Edit: nbtscan -t from 3000-5000 on 10.1.0.0/16 this is hit and miss don't always find windows7 laptop [10.1.1.70|SHELLY-PC |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-88-f2], it may be that the wireless needs more time

terminal output for lameSMBxplorer reads:

# lameSMBxplorer
Network(s):
10.0.0.0/8
ScanNBT 10.0.0.0/8:

Edit: some more test
# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.0.0.0/8
# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.0.0.0/16
# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.0.0.0/24

it appears that it don't like 10.0.0.0

# nbtscan -t 5000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/16
10.1.1.4|THEBOX |<server>|<unknown>|00-19-db-a1-e0-aa
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC |<server>|REPOTEC |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC |<server>|PUPPYPC |00-00-00-00-00-00
# nbtscan -t 6000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/16
10.1.1.4|THEBOX |<server>|<unknown>|00-19-db-a1-e0-aa
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC |<server>|REPOTEC |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC |<server>|PUPPYPC |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.9|SKYES-PC |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-8c-73

10.1.0.0/16 works best above 5000

# nbtscan -t 1000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/24
# nbtscan -t 5000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/24
# nbtscan -t 10000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.0.0/24
# nbtscan -t 1000 -q -r -s "|" 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.1.4|THEBOX |<server>|<unknown>|00-19-db-a1-e0-aa
10.1.1.3|REPOTEC |<server>|REPOTEC |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC |<server>|PUPPYPC |00-00-00-00-00-00
10.1.1.9|SKYES-PC |<server>|<unknown>|0c-ee-e6-b0-8c-73

10.1.0.0/24 is not a go

10.1.1.0/24 is fine

Hope this don't confuse you , it's starting to with me :lol:

User avatar
Patriot
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu 15 Jan 2009, 19:04

#108 Post by Patriot »

Hmmm .....

Geoffrey,

Thanks for the test results. I can see where it borks now. Ok, the issue that we have here can be divided into two:

1. Your subnet netmask is too large for NBT broadcast. Since you're using a netmask of 255.0.0.0 (class A), the scan will fail no matter what timeout value you use. Class A "translates" to more than 16 million ip address to scan and nbtscan is already having a "plate full" with class B (255.255.0.0) subnets. Using very large timeout values doesn't make much sense for normal use.

My suggestion for your netmask, based on your 10.1.1.x assignments :

a) If all your systems/devices are within 10.1.1.x then I suggest using 255.255.255.0 (Class C) netmask.

b) If you have additional segments, example: 10.1.2.x then you can consider a 255.255.0.0 (Class B) netmask. If it's me, I'd create an additional ip (ex: 10.1.2.1) for the network interface.

2. lameSMBxplorer now specifies a reasonable timeout value for larger subnet (class B = 8000ms). This has been added to v0.2.3 alpha.

Please give the attached pet below a test run and let me know how it goes


Rgds
Attachments
lameSMBxplorer-0.2.3a.pet
alpha release with timeout value for 2nd layer scan
(20.13 KiB) Downloaded 860 times

User avatar
Geoffrey
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 08:42
Location: Queensland

#109 Post by Geoffrey »

Patriot,
I've tried the new one but still the same, so I changed the mask as you suggested to 255.255.255.0, this works with the original lameSMBxplorer v0.2.1 beta, I always thought that you couldn't use 10.1.1.x range with 255.255.255.0 as it usually don't like to be setup that way, it did bork at those settings to begin with but does work, it is quite fast at finding the network shares now, within a few seconds far faster than pnethood ever was, it use to take a considerable amount of time, somewhere around the 30 to 40 second mark, this is a vast improvment.

now the only thing I have to do is get the samba sever working properly, as you may have noticed in my previous post, 10.1.1.10|PUPPYPC |<server>|PUPPYPC |00-00-00-00-00-00 , this can be found using xp but I still have to work out the shares and security issues I'm having, would be nice to have a samba package that included a configuration GUI that worked, not to worry it will give me something to work on.

thanks for your help it as been appreciated immensely

Geoffrey

User avatar
Geoffrey
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sun 30 May 2010, 08:42
Location: Queensland

#110 Post by Geoffrey »

It appears that I'm now having problems with my network , after changing all the devices netmask to 255.255.255.0 I now have trouble connecting to my wireless to Ethernet bridge which is connected to my xbox, when it does connect is runs at a snails pace, it's as I thought that the 10.1.1.x ip and the 255.255.255.0 are a mismatch, while setting it up in puppy I got the warning message

I went to this website to check http://www.subnet-calculator.com

though it is possible to set it this way, it does seem to cause a problems, I've been using the 10.1.1.x ips for the last 5 years with no dramas, I also have a laptop with Ubuntu 10.0.4 which runs quite happily using this ip with full network sharing with windows and linux, It's a shame that puppy seems to have an issue with it, well if worst comes to worst I'll just have to change the network to accommodate it.

just thought I'd let you know that it can be a problem.

Geoffrey

EDIT: I need to keep my 10.1.1.x ip's and they need to be in the 255.0.0.0 range to work, else my servers won't be accessible externally so it seems.
Attachments
error_message.gif
(21.53 KiB) Downloaded 2533 times

Post Reply