I do and did run the samba server on the qube, lots of people do, its
running the smb client that became a problem.

I applied the changes to majors.cobalt
device-major    nsmb            char 98                 nsmb

and since I havent actually be able to build the -current userland
without it failing on some missing file error (even though i used cvs,
nother time, nother thread)

so i updated my MAKEDEV
with the suggestion from Hubert

       nsmb*)
               unit=3D${i#nsmb}
               mkdev nsmb$unit c 98 $unit 644
               ;;

i had the create the devices manually "./MAKEDEV nsmb"
but then everything worked
thank you all


the userland i have right now is from the 2.01 restore CD, but the
kernel has been recompiled several times to test and add / disable
things

one thing, the GENERIC kernel doesnt even have the "pseudo-device" or
the "file-system" options included (even with the #) so i had to copy
them from the i386 kernel

no offense, i love my qube, but seeing as how its probably not running
high end server stuff, and most people are using them for file storage

thank you for all your help

-justin


On 5/9/05, Alex Pelts <alexp@broadcom.com> wrote:
> I agree with you on the point of changing large install base. I was just
> thinking that having all the numbers different on all the different
> ports does not help the understanding.
>=20
> I guess there is a little point to have all the numbers change but it
> would be nice if the new numbers would match the existing ones. This way
> new user would not spend much time trying to figure out what number to
> assign. The document describing details would be nice as well (if there
> isn't one already).
>=20
> One thing I am kind of surprised about is that no one run in to this
> problem before. I can't believe that no one tried to run samba server on
> the qube.
>=20
> Thanks,
> Alex
>=20
> Martin Husemann wrote:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:55:30PM -0700, Alex Pelts wrote:
> >
> >>I did not understand what you mean exactly, could you elaborate please?
> >
> >
> > My main point was:
> > since noone cares for the actual numbers, why do you want to reconcile =
them?
> >
> > IIRC they were chosen to help certain compat setups where you use a /de=
v
> > dir from another OS in one way or the other. A special layered filesyst=
em
> > (similar to UMAPFS) that maps device nodes according to a config file
> > could be used to assist this setups instead and allow globaly unique de=
vice
> > major numbers.
> >
> > But then, changing those numbers now, after lots of machines are instal=
led,
> > would be a major PITA.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>