Can't write to samba share
I try to setup a samba file server, but whatever I do I can't get write access to work (reading works fine). This is my current situation:
I have a local fileserver with 3 harddisks mounted at /mnt/share/disk<nr>
. 2 of these use the ext4 filesystem, the third one is ntfs. This file server runs Fedora 18 32-bit. The root folders of these harddisks are owned by superman:superman
, and testparm
outputs the following:
[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = FILE_SERVER
server string = Samba Server Version %v
interfaces = lo, eth0, 192.168.123.191/8
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
unix extensions = No
load printers = No
idmap config * : backend = tdb
hosts allow = 192.168.123.
cups options = raw
wide links = Yes
[share]
comment = Home Directories
path = /home/share/
write list = superman, @users
force user = superman
read only = No
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
inherit permissions = Yes
guest ok = Yes
I've tried a lot to get this to work: the disk are chmodded to 777, I've tried turning off selinux, I've added the samba_share_t
label to the disks and as can be seen in the above output I tried to make the smb config as permissive as I could, but still I cannot write to the share (tried from Windows 7 and another Fedora installation).
What can I try to be able to write to the shares?
EDIT: The replies I got so far are mostly concerned with the smb.conf
. I have however tried a lot of different setup, ready made configs, and solutions to similar problems for the smb.conf
file, so I suspect that the real problem is somewhere else.
samba
add a comment |
I try to setup a samba file server, but whatever I do I can't get write access to work (reading works fine). This is my current situation:
I have a local fileserver with 3 harddisks mounted at /mnt/share/disk<nr>
. 2 of these use the ext4 filesystem, the third one is ntfs. This file server runs Fedora 18 32-bit. The root folders of these harddisks are owned by superman:superman
, and testparm
outputs the following:
[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = FILE_SERVER
server string = Samba Server Version %v
interfaces = lo, eth0, 192.168.123.191/8
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
unix extensions = No
load printers = No
idmap config * : backend = tdb
hosts allow = 192.168.123.
cups options = raw
wide links = Yes
[share]
comment = Home Directories
path = /home/share/
write list = superman, @users
force user = superman
read only = No
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
inherit permissions = Yes
guest ok = Yes
I've tried a lot to get this to work: the disk are chmodded to 777, I've tried turning off selinux, I've added the samba_share_t
label to the disks and as can be seen in the above output I tried to make the smb config as permissive as I could, but still I cannot write to the share (tried from Windows 7 and another Fedora installation).
What can I try to be able to write to the shares?
EDIT: The replies I got so far are mostly concerned with the smb.conf
. I have however tried a lot of different setup, ready made configs, and solutions to similar problems for the smb.conf
file, so I suspect that the real problem is somewhere else.
samba
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
Defaults. Sosecurity = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44
add a comment |
I try to setup a samba file server, but whatever I do I can't get write access to work (reading works fine). This is my current situation:
I have a local fileserver with 3 harddisks mounted at /mnt/share/disk<nr>
. 2 of these use the ext4 filesystem, the third one is ntfs. This file server runs Fedora 18 32-bit. The root folders of these harddisks are owned by superman:superman
, and testparm
outputs the following:
[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = FILE_SERVER
server string = Samba Server Version %v
interfaces = lo, eth0, 192.168.123.191/8
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
unix extensions = No
load printers = No
idmap config * : backend = tdb
hosts allow = 192.168.123.
cups options = raw
wide links = Yes
[share]
comment = Home Directories
path = /home/share/
write list = superman, @users
force user = superman
read only = No
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
inherit permissions = Yes
guest ok = Yes
I've tried a lot to get this to work: the disk are chmodded to 777, I've tried turning off selinux, I've added the samba_share_t
label to the disks and as can be seen in the above output I tried to make the smb config as permissive as I could, but still I cannot write to the share (tried from Windows 7 and another Fedora installation).
What can I try to be able to write to the shares?
EDIT: The replies I got so far are mostly concerned with the smb.conf
. I have however tried a lot of different setup, ready made configs, and solutions to similar problems for the smb.conf
file, so I suspect that the real problem is somewhere else.
samba
I try to setup a samba file server, but whatever I do I can't get write access to work (reading works fine). This is my current situation:
I have a local fileserver with 3 harddisks mounted at /mnt/share/disk<nr>
. 2 of these use the ext4 filesystem, the third one is ntfs. This file server runs Fedora 18 32-bit. The root folders of these harddisks are owned by superman:superman
, and testparm
outputs the following:
[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = FILE_SERVER
server string = Samba Server Version %v
interfaces = lo, eth0, 192.168.123.191/8
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
unix extensions = No
load printers = No
idmap config * : backend = tdb
hosts allow = 192.168.123.
cups options = raw
wide links = Yes
[share]
comment = Home Directories
path = /home/share/
write list = superman, @users
force user = superman
read only = No
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
inherit permissions = Yes
guest ok = Yes
I've tried a lot to get this to work: the disk are chmodded to 777, I've tried turning off selinux, I've added the samba_share_t
label to the disks and as can be seen in the above output I tried to make the smb config as permissive as I could, but still I cannot write to the share (tried from Windows 7 and another Fedora installation).
What can I try to be able to write to the shares?
EDIT: The replies I got so far are mostly concerned with the smb.conf
. I have however tried a lot of different setup, ready made configs, and solutions to similar problems for the smb.conf
file, so I suspect that the real problem is somewhere else.
samba
samba
edited Sep 27 '13 at 10:45
asked Sep 20 '13 at 19:15
Tiddo
1522215
1522215
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
Defaults. Sosecurity = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44
add a comment |
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
Defaults. Sosecurity = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
Defaults. So
security = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
Defaults. So
security = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44
add a comment |
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
You say the root directory is owned by user superman
but also group superman
. Is that not a problem? If superman
is member of the group users
you should make the group of the root directory users
(and force this for all other users) or else all other users will not have access.
So force the shared directories to superman:users
.
After that you could also try changing/adding the following:
valid users = @users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770
force create mode = 0660
force directory mode = 0770
force user = superman
force group = users
This is, if superman
is a member of group users
. If not then add superman
to valid users
.
Groups are not the problem, currently only thesuperman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
add a comment |
You might want to take a look at how you have /mnt/share/disk
linked to /home/share
.
The path that you have in SMB.conf
doesn't match what your mount points are for the drives.
If you are using a symbolic link you might want to check the permissions there.
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
add a comment |
for what it is worth, I couldn't access my samba share, maybe you have forgotten to add you username to the samba password group (for lack of beter description phrase)
this is what I did to get mine to work
smbpasswd -a username
after by using nautilus, shared my drive/folder with right-click, sharing, etc.
create your password, and use your username and passsword (which you just entered) to access your samba drive, you can also map this drive in Windows
hope this could help
add a comment |
Are the group and owner of the shared folder set properly for the samba user? Should be the same, or try
$ chown -R nobody:nogroup sharedfolder
for testing purposes...
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
add a comment |
I had the same problem. from xp i had complete access while W7 showed read and write permission, but could not actually create new files or edit existings. I had:
read only = no
already in the smb.conf
by adding
writeable = yes
(beware! not writable ) windows7 can modify existing files and create new files.
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
add a comment |
The reason can be SELinux.
Try to disable it temporarily and check again.
How to disable: https://www.tecmint.com/disable-selinux-temporarily-permanently-in-centos-rhel-fedora/
Hot to setup: https://www.lisenet.com/2016/samba-server-on-rhel-7/
You need to use samba_share_t
in semanage command.
add a comment |
Here is an example of one of my shares. Take note of the writable
option.
[rails]
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
browseable = yes
writeable = yes
path = /var/rails
I havewritable=yes
in my config, as well asread only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.
– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changingwritable
towriteable
...
– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
add a comment |
Had same problem, actually very frustrating, could browse with all users but remained read only until ..... changed the creat & directory mask to 0777, and did the chmod 777 /{path} and it worked.
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already0777
, and that the OP has donechmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.
– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f648183%2fcant-write-to-samba-share%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
8 Answers
8
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You say the root directory is owned by user superman
but also group superman
. Is that not a problem? If superman
is member of the group users
you should make the group of the root directory users
(and force this for all other users) or else all other users will not have access.
So force the shared directories to superman:users
.
After that you could also try changing/adding the following:
valid users = @users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770
force create mode = 0660
force directory mode = 0770
force user = superman
force group = users
This is, if superman
is a member of group users
. If not then add superman
to valid users
.
Groups are not the problem, currently only thesuperman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
add a comment |
You say the root directory is owned by user superman
but also group superman
. Is that not a problem? If superman
is member of the group users
you should make the group of the root directory users
(and force this for all other users) or else all other users will not have access.
So force the shared directories to superman:users
.
After that you could also try changing/adding the following:
valid users = @users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770
force create mode = 0660
force directory mode = 0770
force user = superman
force group = users
This is, if superman
is a member of group users
. If not then add superman
to valid users
.
Groups are not the problem, currently only thesuperman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
add a comment |
You say the root directory is owned by user superman
but also group superman
. Is that not a problem? If superman
is member of the group users
you should make the group of the root directory users
(and force this for all other users) or else all other users will not have access.
So force the shared directories to superman:users
.
After that you could also try changing/adding the following:
valid users = @users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770
force create mode = 0660
force directory mode = 0770
force user = superman
force group = users
This is, if superman
is a member of group users
. If not then add superman
to valid users
.
You say the root directory is owned by user superman
but also group superman
. Is that not a problem? If superman
is member of the group users
you should make the group of the root directory users
(and force this for all other users) or else all other users will not have access.
So force the shared directories to superman:users
.
After that you could also try changing/adding the following:
valid users = @users
create mode = 0660
directory mode = 0770
force create mode = 0660
force directory mode = 0770
force user = superman
force group = users
This is, if superman
is a member of group users
. If not then add superman
to valid users
.
edited Sep 25 '13 at 18:10
answered Sep 25 '13 at 17:38
Rik
10.9k12133
10.9k12133
Groups are not the problem, currently only thesuperman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
add a comment |
Groups are not the problem, currently only thesuperman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.
– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
Groups are not the problem, currently only the
superman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
Groups are not the problem, currently only the
superman
user should have access to the share. However, I tried you solution, but it didn't work unfortunately.– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:37
add a comment |
You might want to take a look at how you have /mnt/share/disk
linked to /home/share
.
The path that you have in SMB.conf
doesn't match what your mount points are for the drives.
If you are using a symbolic link you might want to check the permissions there.
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
add a comment |
You might want to take a look at how you have /mnt/share/disk
linked to /home/share
.
The path that you have in SMB.conf
doesn't match what your mount points are for the drives.
If you are using a symbolic link you might want to check the permissions there.
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
add a comment |
You might want to take a look at how you have /mnt/share/disk
linked to /home/share
.
The path that you have in SMB.conf
doesn't match what your mount points are for the drives.
If you are using a symbolic link you might want to check the permissions there.
You might want to take a look at how you have /mnt/share/disk
linked to /home/share
.
The path that you have in SMB.conf
doesn't match what your mount points are for the drives.
If you are using a symbolic link you might want to check the permissions there.
edited Oct 23 '14 at 6:12
JakeGould
31k1093137
31k1093137
answered Sep 30 '13 at 19:43
Clint
1073
1073
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
add a comment |
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
That's a good catch! I'm currently not at home, but I'll look into it when I'm there.
– Tiddo
Sep 30 '13 at 19:49
add a comment |
for what it is worth, I couldn't access my samba share, maybe you have forgotten to add you username to the samba password group (for lack of beter description phrase)
this is what I did to get mine to work
smbpasswd -a username
after by using nautilus, shared my drive/folder with right-click, sharing, etc.
create your password, and use your username and passsword (which you just entered) to access your samba drive, you can also map this drive in Windows
hope this could help
add a comment |
for what it is worth, I couldn't access my samba share, maybe you have forgotten to add you username to the samba password group (for lack of beter description phrase)
this is what I did to get mine to work
smbpasswd -a username
after by using nautilus, shared my drive/folder with right-click, sharing, etc.
create your password, and use your username and passsword (which you just entered) to access your samba drive, you can also map this drive in Windows
hope this could help
add a comment |
for what it is worth, I couldn't access my samba share, maybe you have forgotten to add you username to the samba password group (for lack of beter description phrase)
this is what I did to get mine to work
smbpasswd -a username
after by using nautilus, shared my drive/folder with right-click, sharing, etc.
create your password, and use your username and passsword (which you just entered) to access your samba drive, you can also map this drive in Windows
hope this could help
for what it is worth, I couldn't access my samba share, maybe you have forgotten to add you username to the samba password group (for lack of beter description phrase)
this is what I did to get mine to work
smbpasswd -a username
after by using nautilus, shared my drive/folder with right-click, sharing, etc.
create your password, and use your username and passsword (which you just entered) to access your samba drive, you can also map this drive in Windows
hope this could help
answered Nov 17 '15 at 19:21
Cybex
40821029
40821029
add a comment |
add a comment |
Are the group and owner of the shared folder set properly for the samba user? Should be the same, or try
$ chown -R nobody:nogroup sharedfolder
for testing purposes...
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
add a comment |
Are the group and owner of the shared folder set properly for the samba user? Should be the same, or try
$ chown -R nobody:nogroup sharedfolder
for testing purposes...
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
add a comment |
Are the group and owner of the shared folder set properly for the samba user? Should be the same, or try
$ chown -R nobody:nogroup sharedfolder
for testing purposes...
Are the group and owner of the shared folder set properly for the samba user? Should be the same, or try
$ chown -R nobody:nogroup sharedfolder
for testing purposes...
edited Sep 14 '16 at 14:48
answered Sep 14 '16 at 13:11
Robert Burik
164
164
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
add a comment |
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
Requests for clarification, diagnostic suggestions, and speculative solutions go in a comment. Answers are reserved for actual solutions.
– fixer1234
Sep 14 '16 at 16:34
add a comment |
I had the same problem. from xp i had complete access while W7 showed read and write permission, but could not actually create new files or edit existings. I had:
read only = no
already in the smb.conf
by adding
writeable = yes
(beware! not writable ) windows7 can modify existing files and create new files.
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
add a comment |
I had the same problem. from xp i had complete access while W7 showed read and write permission, but could not actually create new files or edit existings. I had:
read only = no
already in the smb.conf
by adding
writeable = yes
(beware! not writable ) windows7 can modify existing files and create new files.
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
add a comment |
I had the same problem. from xp i had complete access while W7 showed read and write permission, but could not actually create new files or edit existings. I had:
read only = no
already in the smb.conf
by adding
writeable = yes
(beware! not writable ) windows7 can modify existing files and create new files.
I had the same problem. from xp i had complete access while W7 showed read and write permission, but could not actually create new files or edit existings. I had:
read only = no
already in the smb.conf
by adding
writeable = yes
(beware! not writable ) windows7 can modify existing files and create new files.
edited Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
answered Sep 14 '16 at 12:45
bigmarck
11
11
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
add a comment |
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
no, they are not supposed to be there of course. I edit this.
– bigmarck
Sep 16 '16 at 11:39
add a comment |
The reason can be SELinux.
Try to disable it temporarily and check again.
How to disable: https://www.tecmint.com/disable-selinux-temporarily-permanently-in-centos-rhel-fedora/
Hot to setup: https://www.lisenet.com/2016/samba-server-on-rhel-7/
You need to use samba_share_t
in semanage command.
add a comment |
The reason can be SELinux.
Try to disable it temporarily and check again.
How to disable: https://www.tecmint.com/disable-selinux-temporarily-permanently-in-centos-rhel-fedora/
Hot to setup: https://www.lisenet.com/2016/samba-server-on-rhel-7/
You need to use samba_share_t
in semanage command.
add a comment |
The reason can be SELinux.
Try to disable it temporarily and check again.
How to disable: https://www.tecmint.com/disable-selinux-temporarily-permanently-in-centos-rhel-fedora/
Hot to setup: https://www.lisenet.com/2016/samba-server-on-rhel-7/
You need to use samba_share_t
in semanage command.
The reason can be SELinux.
Try to disable it temporarily and check again.
How to disable: https://www.tecmint.com/disable-selinux-temporarily-permanently-in-centos-rhel-fedora/
Hot to setup: https://www.lisenet.com/2016/samba-server-on-rhel-7/
You need to use samba_share_t
in semanage command.
answered Dec 13 '18 at 6:44
Maxim
1316
1316
add a comment |
add a comment |
Here is an example of one of my shares. Take note of the writable
option.
[rails]
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
browseable = yes
writeable = yes
path = /var/rails
I havewritable=yes
in my config, as well asread only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.
– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changingwritable
towriteable
...
– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
add a comment |
Here is an example of one of my shares. Take note of the writable
option.
[rails]
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
browseable = yes
writeable = yes
path = /var/rails
I havewritable=yes
in my config, as well asread only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.
– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changingwritable
towriteable
...
– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
add a comment |
Here is an example of one of my shares. Take note of the writable
option.
[rails]
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
browseable = yes
writeable = yes
path = /var/rails
Here is an example of one of my shares. Take note of the writable
option.
[rails]
create mask = 0777
directory mask = 0777
browseable = yes
writeable = yes
path = /var/rails
answered Sep 20 '13 at 20:33
kobaltz
14.1k32752
14.1k32752
I havewritable=yes
in my config, as well asread only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.
– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changingwritable
towriteable
...
– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
add a comment |
I havewritable=yes
in my config, as well asread only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.
– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changingwritable
towriteable
...
– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
I have
writable=yes
in my config, as well as read only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I have
writable=yes
in my config, as well as read only = no
. These 2 are synonymous to each other and hence only one is shown in the output. I suspect the problem isn't in my config file but somewhere else. However I have no idea where.– Tiddo
Sep 21 '13 at 10:58
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changing
writable
to writeable
...– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
I had the same problem and I fixed it by changing
writable
to writeable
...– Grzegorz Gierlik
Feb 14 '14 at 23:51
add a comment |
Had same problem, actually very frustrating, could browse with all users but remained read only until ..... changed the creat & directory mask to 0777, and did the chmod 777 /{path} and it worked.
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already0777
, and that the OP has donechmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.
– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
add a comment |
Had same problem, actually very frustrating, could browse with all users but remained read only until ..... changed the creat & directory mask to 0777, and did the chmod 777 /{path} and it worked.
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already0777
, and that the OP has donechmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.
– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
add a comment |
Had same problem, actually very frustrating, could browse with all users but remained read only until ..... changed the creat & directory mask to 0777, and did the chmod 777 /{path} and it worked.
Had same problem, actually very frustrating, could browse with all users but remained read only until ..... changed the creat & directory mask to 0777, and did the chmod 777 /{path} and it worked.
answered Nov 17 '15 at 19:16
Ashraf
1
1
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already0777
, and that the OP has donechmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.
– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
add a comment |
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already0777
, and that the OP has donechmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.
– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
1
1
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already
0777
, and that the OP has done chmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
The question indicates that create mask and directory mask are already
0777
, and that the OP has done chmod 777
, so this is a non-answer.– Scott
Nov 17 '15 at 21:52
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f648183%2fcant-write-to-samba-share%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What are the parameters for: security, map to guest, guest account, browseable.
– harrymc
Sep 25 '13 at 13:25
Defaults. So
security = user, map to guest = never, guest account = nobody, browseable = true
.– Tiddo
Sep 27 '13 at 10:44
"security = user" requires correct username/password. Have you used smbpasswd? Better info in Chapter 9. Users and Security.
– harrymc
Sep 27 '13 at 11:41
what happens if you remove the inherit permissions setting? it and the mask settings conflict. aslo could you please confirm that /home/share is 777, not just its contents? samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch08.html
– Frank Thomas
Sep 27 '13 at 11:44