Subj : Accessing SHARES on DOS P To : Peter Knapper From : Mike Powell Date : Fri Apr 01 2005 12:31 pm > > I am attempting to migrate my BBS over from my machine that is running > > MS-DOS 6.22 to my OS/2 machine. >That should be a reasonably straight forward task.........;-) Most of it has been. ;-) > > I originally had the idea that I would then convert the DOS machine into > > a debian box, set up samba, and let it be a file server to the BBS, via > > the network. >It depends on how "busy" your BBS is. This usually works fine for the Files >section, but messages can be another story due to the level of HD activity >required for management of the message base (message import and export as well >as BBS access and management of the Message base). The most successful >Networked Message bases I have heard of have been where all message processing >was LOCAL to the Message Base box, and only user read/write acesss was >performed across the Network. However in theory it should all be do-able. I will keep all of that in mind. I was planning to do it mainly for the file areas. > > However, OS/2 and samba no longer get along, >It sounds like you have run into the issue relating to the latest version of >Samba (V3 ???), you need to back-level Samba 1 version to get it working again. >I hear there is a fix for this in the pipeline but I have no details as I do >not run Samba myself... Back-level? Do you mean downgrade? That could be done. It seemed to work fine until I upgraded to a backported version, due to a security patch. I run debian stable, but the patch was written for unstable or testing, so the backport was necessary. > > so I had the > > brilliant idea that the MS-DOS networking tools might allow the OS/2 > > box to access the file drives on the DOS box (which would require > > no conversion to debian/samba). >Question, why not just migrate the BBS to OS/2 in total, is there a definite >need for a seperate Linux (or DOS) environment? Well, my plan was that the linux box would have extra CD-ROMs, as well as be able to mount CD images, so that I could finally have all of my SIMTEL and other old DOS shareware CDs online at once. Will OS/2 easily mount a CD-image? If I have to put all the CD and HD drives in the same box, I was thinking it might get a little crowded. ;-) > 1. An OS2/DOS VDM. This is the conventional "Dos Session" that most people >use. ALL resources for this session are provided by OS/2, to the VDM. If a >Resource needed by the DOS session doesn't exist or work under OS/2, then its >not available under DOS. At the time the DOS VDM is started, it automatically >inherits the resources visible to OS/2. EG If you have a Networked OS/2 box >that has connections to remote Network resources, and you run an OS/2 Windows >session, note that Windows File Manager shows all OS/2 Networked drives as >LOCAL drives, and not as Network resources! Thats why the Windows support under >OS/2 does not need to be the equivalent of Windows for Workgroups, because >Network support is not needed integrated into Windows itself. I suspect this is >why your DOS Network support is not working... Actually, I have not even tried accessing the remote shares under DOS. It is not even working correctly under OS/2. That is, under Connections, I am not able to see the shares on the DOS box (although I can see the DOS box itself). I'd suspect the DOS box, except that my Win98SE box is not having any problems accessing the shares. I am using the above method for the DOS BBS program, btw, so I deleted the second method. For reasons you mentioned, I don't think it would work. ;-) > > I am surprised that OS/2 will not allow me to access > > the machine. >I am not surprised, your symptoms are EXACTLY the reported issue with the >latest version of SAMBA. I may have mis-typed. I was not surprised the OS/2 box would not access the linux samba box. I was surprised that it would not access the DOS box. >I have not heard of anyone who has been able to (successfully) get this >working. I really think your best bet is to back-level Samba and everything >will then work as you originally wanted, however putting the entire BBS on an >OS/2 box is (IMHO) the best option. I will further explore both of these options. The only reason I wanted to try the DOS way was that it would require less down time, as the box in question is currently running DOS (it is the current home of the BBS), and would not require conversion when the BBS migrated to the OS/2 machine. Mike --- * SLMR 2.1a * I can't pretend a stranger is a long-awaited friend... --- GTMail 1.26 * Origin: Kentucky's Capitol City Online * 502/875-8938 (1:2320/105.0) .