I’m curious as to why two of the Samba shares installed by default in smb.conf are so similar in properties; I can’t see the point of having them both. These are the two shares I’m talking about:
[homes]
comment = Home Directories
valid users = %S, %D%w%S
browseable = No
read only = No
inherit acls = Yes
[profiles]
comment = Network Profiles Service
path = %H
read only = No
store dos attributes = Yes
create mask = 0600
directory mask = 0700
The first has address smb://server/username. The second has address smb://server/profiles. They both in reality address the home directory of the connecting user. Both very nice, cute and useful. But why would the devs include them both in the default smb.conf, I wonder.
Obviously I’m missing something. Can you tell me what it is please?
>
> I’m curious as to why two of the Samba shares installed by default in
> smb.conf are so similar in properties; I can’t see the point of having
> them both. These are the two shares I’m talking about:
>> [homes]
>> comment = Home Directories
>> valid users = %S, %D%w%S
>> browseable = No
>> read only = No
>> inherit acls = Yes
>> [profiles]
>> comment = Network Profiles Service
>> path = %H
>> read only = No
>> store dos attributes = Yes
>> create mask = 0600
>> directory mask = 0700
>
> The first has address smb://server/username. The second has address
> smb://server/profiles. They both in reality address the home directory
> of the connecting user. Both very nice, cute and useful. But why would
> the devs include them both in the default smb.conf, I wonder.
>
> Obviously I’m missing something. Can you tell me what it is please?
>
> Thanks
> Swerdna
>
>
John;
The [profiles] share is the share used only for storing roaming profiles.
This is expected by MS and need not be mapped to the home director. Many
administrators will store the roaming profiles in another directory
(e.g. /var/lib/samba/%U). The [homes] share gives the user access to the
home directory on the Linux server. Even if one does not use roaming
profiles, this will still be available. Does this help?
P. V.
“We’re all in this together, I’m pulling for you.” Red Green
> On Sun January 11 2009 11:06 pm, swerdna wrote:
>
<snip>
>>
>> Obviously I’m missing something. Can you tell me what it is please?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Swerdna
>>
>>
> John;
>
<snip>
Notice I’ve answered your question the day before you even asked it.
P. V.
“We’re all in this together, I’m pulling for you.” Red Green