Correct RAID isn't a share 'name' as such it is a volume label that defines as it suggests a 'RAID' of 2 drives in a NAS server, sharing just //...//RAID would result in a directory level I do not actually need, as I don't need root directory access to RAID but folders that are within RAID.This is not exactly correct, it is allowed to specify one or more directory names following the share name.You appear to falling into the same trap as another user on here, it is //server/share when using cifs.
Where are you mounting from ? and what is the share name ?
In this case the share name might be "RAID" with directories "Emu" and "OS".
However I suspect that you are right with your assumption that this "RAID" is not a share name.
If RAID isn't a share name, that implies your mounts may not be working. Which then implies that you're actually writing to the root media which, in turn, implies that changing mount options is unlikely to help.
Further, a volume label is something completely different and not part of the directory structure (except when using an automounter which may create mount points usig it).
After some digging ..It's all in the mount options.
See my guide: Using fstab A Beginner's Guide
And, yes, there are more than one way of doing it.I'm guess it's file_mode/dir_mode that made the difference ?Code:
//192.168.1.200/RAID/Emu /mnt/Emu cifs defaults,noatime,nofail,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,username=<>,password=<> 0 0//192.168.1.200/RAID/OS /mnt/OS cifs defaults,noatime,nofail,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,username=<>,password=<> 0 0
Yes. But see above. Personally though I'd use file_mode=666 as odds are you don't need every file on the share to be marked as executable. Unless you have a pathological aversion to the number of the beast (well kinda, file mode is in octal not decimal).You do need execute permission on directories though.
Apples & Bananas, it may as well say arsenic and lemons. As odd as this sounds, after using Linux since 96' after awhile you begin to not care what technical mumbo jumbo definitions other ego tripping loony people useSorry, but no it is correct, this is from 'man mount.cifs';
This is not exactly correct, it is allowed to specify one or more directory names following the share name.
In this case the share name might be "RAID" with directories "Emu" and "OS".
However I suspect that you are right with your assumption that this "RAID" is not a share name.Code:
The mount.cifs utility attaches the UNC name (exported network re‐ source) specified as service (using //server/share syntax, where "server" is the server name or IP address and "share" is the name of the share) to the local directory mount-point.
I find that insulting. Was it meant to be humour? (my emphasis). Comments like that are not a good way to make friends and influence people. Escpecially when asking those people for help.
and define your own logic to describe things, because 9 times out of 10 your either learning a terminology, that means a deep dive into the topic until you reach 0's and 1's, or it is so convoluted that you need a doctorate in all known languages just to understand what on earth they are on about. Instead you define your own layer above them;
Which makes it that much harder for others to understand what you're talking about. AFAIK the terminology is, and has always been, "share". Learn the correct (or at least the incorrect but in comon usage) terms and concepts. It'll make life easier in the long run.
It's like going to your local garden centre and asking for a manually operated excavator when what you actually mean is a spade.
If your server is running Linux and Samba you can clear up some of the confusion (on both sides) by posting the output from
Code:
testparm -sStatistics: Posted by thagrol — Sat Mar 16, 2024 12:44 am