[OpenIndiana-discuss] samba4

[maurilio.longo at libero.it]

Hi all,

I have an old file server, running samba 3.x and I was planning to replace it with a newer unit running latest hipster.

I've installed samba with pkg install samba, and it installed samba version of 4.21.1, my /etc/samba/smb.conf file contains just a test share

[global]
server role = standalone server
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = SAMBA4
security = user
log level = 3
max log size = 10000
passdb backend = smbpasswd
 
[smb4test]
comment = Test SMB 4
path = /nas/testsmb/sys
read only = No
guest ok = No
force user = frecover
force group = frecover
create mask = 0770
directory mask = 0770

so, nothing fancy, no AD server, nothing, just a shared unit accessible from user "frecover" with primary group "frecover".
 
Here start my problems, first, the share is not visible from explorer on a windows 10/11 PC. It seems that it is a problem with samba4 that does not support netbios anymore and can be overcome with a python utility named wsdd.
 
I did not try wsdd because this is not the biggest problem, though, the real problem is that I can copy and paste a file on the share from explorer, but if I open the file with notepad and try to save it I get an error that I don't have the authorization to save it, which makes no sense given I was able to copy it a second before.
 
On the samba log I get this error every time I try to save the file
 
[2025/03/13 09:42:30.130859, 0] ../../source3/smbd/fd_handle.c:115(fsp_get_io_fd)
fsp_get_io_fd: fsp [test.txt] is a path referencing fsp
 
Googling for this message gives no clue, apart from a problem on Linux/btrfs, which has been solved since samba 4.16.x and even trying the workaround that at that time was suggested for btrfs does not make any difference.
 
So my question is: is there anyone here using samba4 on a current hipster server as a file server and if so, is there some smb.conf's magic that has to be performed to make it work?
 
Thanks.
 
Maurilio.
 
PS. I have no experience with kernel SMB service, so I'd prefer to stick to samba4, if possibile,  given that I have SMB1 units that should be able to access exported shares and I'm not sure SMB kernel service still supports SMB1.