SMB hard crash

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Every time I use SMB I hard crash. It happened in all versions of 10.1 on my iBook and also Jaguar. All I am doing is downloading files from windows. Now on my PB 12" with all versions of Jaguar so far, all I need to do is use the computer a bit with a mounted SMB share on, and SMACK hi there, I'm Colonel Panic, you should restart your computer. Rather embarassing when in front of PC people. Maybe it's a M$ intentional sabotage? I mean how can Apple claim they've perfected SMB in every freaking update since 10.1.x and it still sucks the same?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    fuzz_ballfuzz_ball Posts: 390member
    Do you by any chance have more than one SMB share open (or are in the process of opening another SMB share) when these crashes occur?
  • Reply 2 of 11
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    No. Maybe by the time I get back to college in Fall after 10.3.1 SMB will finally work. I wonder if it's a M$ thing, since I have only tried from my Mac to XP, not to any other *NIX platform. Nonetheless SMB is less than awesome now on Jaguar.
  • Reply 3 of 11
    pbpb Posts: 4,224member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    I wonder if it's a M$ thing, since I have only tried from my Mac to XP, not to any other *NIX platform.



    Quite possible. I had zero problems in connecting to Windows Millenium and 2000 machines in Jaguar and MacOS X 10.1.5 (10.1.4 and previous were another story). Not tried to an XP machine though.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    I've not had problems using SMB to an XP machine. Then again, I've only used it sparingly so...
  • Reply 5 of 11
    madmax559madmax559 Posts: 596member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    No. Maybe by the time I get back to college in Fall after 10.3.1 SMB will finally work. I wonder if it's a M$ thing, since I have only tried from my Mac to XP, not to any other *NIX platform. Nonetheless SMB is less than awesome now on Jaguar.



    its not an "m$" thing .... i have a linux server

    sitting behind me running smbd/nmbd & havent had any issues

    so far or crashes

    apples implementation of smb is botched up & will possibly

    be fixed in their next rev.
  • Reply 6 of 11
    gizzmonicgizzmonic Posts: 511member
    Madmax is right, there's some serious bugs in the Apple implementation of Samba. The only Kernel Panics that I've experienced in OS X have been while using SMB (besides a few that were due to flaky SCSI firmware).
  • Reply 7 of 11
    colby2000colby2000 Posts: 91member
    SMB was working fine for me (I use it to transfer files to/from my XP machine at work). Until today, that is. Today was the first time I've tried to connect to a Windows share since I upgraded to 10.2.6. Now, every time I try to connect to a share I get that lovely kernal panic...very nice.

    Of course, I've been meaning to reinstall everything on my PB for a while. Maybe I'll get around to it this weekend and that will fix it.
  • Reply 8 of 11
    razzfazzrazzfazz Posts: 728member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gizzmonic

    Madmax is right, there's some serious bugs in the Apple implementation of Samba. The only Kernel Panics that I've experienced in OS X have been while using SMB (besides a few that were due to flaky SCSI firmware).



    Actually, Samba is only used for creating SMB shares on the OS X machine, not for mounting shares from other machines. The latter is handles by smbfs, a kernel-level filesystem. Samba, on the other hand is implemented purely in user-space, and as such is pretty unlikely to cause any kernel panics.
  • Reply 9 of 11
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    RazzFazz thank you for pointing that out. So it must be smbfs. Whatever it is, it sucks. Isn't that portion of OS X open source? I wonder if anyone out there has ventured a peak at it that knows anything about this kind of thing.
  • Reply 10 of 11
    pyr3pyr3 Posts: 946member
    I've had a lot of kernel panics since I got my TiBook last August. Almost all were Samba-related.



    One really weird bug is that if it's having a hard time contacting the host to mount the share, and the progress bar is up, sometimes if you cancel in the middle of that, it will kernel panic a few minutes later. Even if you do nothing else with Samba.



    I have been using Samba for going between my TiBook and an XP server box, at the beginning, but then I made the server box run Debian, and the kernel panics died down. I might also have not been using samba as much after that though, so it's nothing conclusive.



    Another crappy thing about Samba is that if you put to sleep with a share mounted and either wait until the server decides that the connection has timed out, or wake it up on a different network ALL THE F**KING programs go soooooo f**king slow. Sorry for that, but it is the one thing I hate about MacOS above all else. It's all fine and dandy if it wants to try and wait an ungodly amount of time before deciding that the connection is timed out, linux and bsd do that, but it shouldn't cause every program on the machine to run slow ( mostly programs take an extra 3 to 4 minutes longer to load, even textpad and calculator.app ). The kicker is that a lot of the programs will run fine once they get past the initial startup. Sometimes the entire OS grinds to a halt too. Seriously, should the OS lockup just because a server isn't there anymore ? I don't think so.
  • Reply 11 of 11
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Just to be clear you are talking about smbfs NOT Samba because you are a client not a server I assume. Yeah I've never had a kernal panic when I haven't had a SMB share mounted. I mean without installing ghetto software how else can you make OS X crash, besides some weird SCSI issues? (SCSI always sucked anyway IMHO and 1394b should finally kill it)



    Also did anyone ever notice some weird stuff shows up in Connect to... that doesn't in XP's "Network"? Some only show in one, some in another. I don't know anything about networking but I found that weird. And what's with the different errors you get? I believe 36 means wrong password, there's another one in the thousands I get a lot too. Wouldn't it be nice if error messages had a "More..." button to see what the hell -36 means? WRONG PASSWORD is better than a stupid number, that was always my pet peeve that I had to look it up in AppleErrorCodes.com
Sign In or Register to comment.