sharing folders with Nautilus
wayward4now at gmail.com
Mon Nov 8 18:33:47 UTC 2010
On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 02:44 -0500, Tom H wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 7:34 PM, NoOp <glgxg at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > On 11/07/2010 12:02 PM, Scott Berry wrote:
> >>> $ cat /etc/hosts
> >> 192.168.1.100 Princess # Added by NetworkManager
> >> 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
> >> ::1 Princess localhost6.localdomain6 localhost6 scott.CANINE
> >>> $ hostname
> >> Princess
> >>> $ users
> >> scott scott
> >>> $ cat /etc/samba/smb.conf
> >>> [note: *only* provide the lines containing:
> >>> # Change this to the workgroup/NT-domain name your Samba server will part of
> >> workgroup = CANINE ( just changed)
> >>> Now: please provide the Windows workgroup name that you use on your
> >>> Windows systems (right click 'My Computer' & click on
> >>> Properties|Computer Name - you'll see is listed as 'Workgroup:
> >>> <workgroupname>).
> >> CANINE
> > Then
> > 127.0.0.1 localhost scott.Canine
> > would be the correct entry.
> "scott.Canine"?! "<user>.<workgroup>"?!
> Don't you mean "Princess.Canine"?
> As a follow-up to a thread of the last few days and for the sake of
> Googlers, the canonical Debian/Ubuntu ipv4 "/etc/hosts" setup would be
> (even though I don't use it):
> 192.168.1.100 Princess # Added by NetworkManager
> 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
> 127.0.1.1 Princess.Canine Princess
Sure that's right? You have 192.168.1.100 set to resolve to "Princess"
and 127.0.1.1 set to alias to "Princess" Wouldn't it blow up? Plus, he's
got Network Mangler added to the mix. No telling what will happen at any
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256
More information about the ubuntu-users