nautilus vs. mount windows filesystems?

[darshadow]

Hi,

My pc is running linux mint and I need to mount the filesystem from the windows filesserver.
So, I've started nautilus and do : Files -> connect to server.... and all is fine, I means I could open all directories/files.
Now, I try to connect with the command mount because I could insert into a cron, etc... I put the following command line:

Code: Select all

sudo /sbin/mount.cifs //servername/FSPublic /mnt/FSPublic -o user=username
or
sudo /sbin/mount.cifs //servername/FSPublic /mnt/FSPublic -o gid=1000,uid=1000,user=username,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777, rw 0 0


The result is ok, I see all the directories but I cannot open all directories, some are permissions deny!!!
Why with nautilus is ok but not with the mount?
As someone an ideas?

Best regards

[altair4]

If you are happy with the "Connect to Server" results and the only reason you want to do this with a mount.cifs is because you want to have it mounted at login then there is another way - actually 2:

[1] You could just add an entry into your startup applications that looks like this:

Code: Select all

gvfs-mount smb://servername/FSPublic

Then every time you login your share will mount to $HOME/.gvfs.

[2] If your needs are more complex or if the server is not always running when you login then I would suggest Gigolo:
Using Gigolo to Mount Remote Samba Shares: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=52144
Gigolo will wait for the remote server to be up or the network is up before it attempts to mount it's share.

Anyway, It's been a while since I did a classic smb mount but I think you need to throw in a "nounix" option to the mix:

Code: Select all

sudo /sbin/mount.cifs //servername/FSPublic /mnt/FSPublic -o gid=1000,uid=1000,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,rw,nounix 0 0

[darshadow]

Hi,

Thanks a lot for your help!

So, the command [1] is really ok and I use it now.
the command [2] doesn't run well, but I don't known why!!!

anyway thanks for your tips

best regards,

[altair4]

Hi,

Thanks a lot for your help!

So, the command [1] is really ok and I use it now.
the command [2] doesn't run well, but I don't known why!!!

anyway thanks for your tips

best regards,

It's interesting that you have problems with [2] but not with [1] because Gigolo uses the exact same command as [1] does. Gigolo is just a gui to gvfs-mount with some added features. Anyway , glad you got it working.