“failed to retrieve share list from server: file already exists” (Can't access samba shares after 18.04)...
After upgrading from 16.04 to 18.04 I can't access my samba shares anymore.
I can login with my credential to the samba share (it's an office windows server) but get stuck with the same error:
"failed to retrieve share list from server: file already exists"
Is it possible that I should clean up samba config files?
Thank you
EDIT:
found a workaround (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211) typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Still missing the possibility to see the list of samba shares though.
server 18.04 samba
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
add a comment |
After upgrading from 16.04 to 18.04 I can't access my samba shares anymore.
I can login with my credential to the samba share (it's an office windows server) but get stuck with the same error:
"failed to retrieve share list from server: file already exists"
Is it possible that I should clean up samba config files?
Thank you
EDIT:
found a workaround (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211) typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Still missing the possibility to see the list of samba shares though.
server 18.04 samba
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40
add a comment |
After upgrading from 16.04 to 18.04 I can't access my samba shares anymore.
I can login with my credential to the samba share (it's an office windows server) but get stuck with the same error:
"failed to retrieve share list from server: file already exists"
Is it possible that I should clean up samba config files?
Thank you
EDIT:
found a workaround (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211) typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Still missing the possibility to see the list of samba shares though.
server 18.04 samba
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
After upgrading from 16.04 to 18.04 I can't access my samba shares anymore.
I can login with my credential to the samba share (it's an office windows server) but get stuck with the same error:
"failed to retrieve share list from server: file already exists"
Is it possible that I should clean up samba config files?
Thank you
EDIT:
found a workaround (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211) typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Still missing the possibility to see the list of samba shares though.
server 18.04 samba
server 18.04 samba
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
edited Aug 30 '18 at 6:48
Francesco Tocci
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
asked Aug 29 '18 at 15:48
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
15
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40
add a comment |
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Initially I found a workaround, typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Apparently there is a related bugreport: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211
And here is the full solution:
sudo apt install smbclient
and then edit /etc/samba/smb.conf right under the workgroup = WORKGROUP line and add this line to change the default:
client max protocol = NT1
Reference:
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2384959
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
add a comment |
While setting client max protocol = NT1 will "work" at least when addressing older machines, enabling SMBv1 called NT1 in samba, and forcing its use (which is what this does) is not a good idea from a security standpoint.
SMBv1 is a really old, deprecated, flawed, and insecure, protocol.
Reference: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/
It's also not going to help to deal with Win10 machines which are now defaulting to simply not having SMBv1 installed, those are likely to respond to smbclient -L ... with:
protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET
Failed to connect with SMB1 -- no workgroup available
@Francesco Your original "workaround" is actually a better and safer "answer".
Anyway, please don't force SMBv1 :-)
(this would have been more appropriately posted as a comment, however I lack sufficient reputation to do things "properly".)
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1070185%2ffailed-to-retrieve-share-list-from-server-file-already-exists-cant-access-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Initially I found a workaround, typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Apparently there is a related bugreport: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211
And here is the full solution:
sudo apt install smbclient
and then edit /etc/samba/smb.conf right under the workgroup = WORKGROUP line and add this line to change the default:
client max protocol = NT1
Reference:
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2384959
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
add a comment |
Initially I found a workaround, typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Apparently there is a related bugreport: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211
And here is the full solution:
sudo apt install smbclient
and then edit /etc/samba/smb.conf right under the workgroup = WORKGROUP line and add this line to change the default:
client max protocol = NT1
Reference:
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2384959
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
add a comment |
Initially I found a workaround, typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Apparently there is a related bugreport: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211
And here is the full solution:
sudo apt install smbclient
and then edit /etc/samba/smb.conf right under the workgroup = WORKGROUP line and add this line to change the default:
client max protocol = NT1
Reference:
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2384959
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
Initially I found a workaround, typing the full name of the samba share on the address bar give me access to the directory. Apparently there is a related bugreport: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211
And here is the full solution:
sudo apt install smbclient
and then edit /etc/samba/smb.conf right under the workgroup = WORKGROUP line and add this line to change the default:
client max protocol = NT1
Reference:
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2384959
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
answered Sep 13 '18 at 10:33
Francesco TocciFrancesco Tocci
15
15
add a comment |
add a comment |
While setting client max protocol = NT1 will "work" at least when addressing older machines, enabling SMBv1 called NT1 in samba, and forcing its use (which is what this does) is not a good idea from a security standpoint.
SMBv1 is a really old, deprecated, flawed, and insecure, protocol.
Reference: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/
It's also not going to help to deal with Win10 machines which are now defaulting to simply not having SMBv1 installed, those are likely to respond to smbclient -L ... with:
protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET
Failed to connect with SMB1 -- no workgroup available
@Francesco Your original "workaround" is actually a better and safer "answer".
Anyway, please don't force SMBv1 :-)
(this would have been more appropriately posted as a comment, however I lack sufficient reputation to do things "properly".)
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
While setting client max protocol = NT1 will "work" at least when addressing older machines, enabling SMBv1 called NT1 in samba, and forcing its use (which is what this does) is not a good idea from a security standpoint.
SMBv1 is a really old, deprecated, flawed, and insecure, protocol.
Reference: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/
It's also not going to help to deal with Win10 machines which are now defaulting to simply not having SMBv1 installed, those are likely to respond to smbclient -L ... with:
protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET
Failed to connect with SMB1 -- no workgroup available
@Francesco Your original "workaround" is actually a better and safer "answer".
Anyway, please don't force SMBv1 :-)
(this would have been more appropriately posted as a comment, however I lack sufficient reputation to do things "properly".)
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
While setting client max protocol = NT1 will "work" at least when addressing older machines, enabling SMBv1 called NT1 in samba, and forcing its use (which is what this does) is not a good idea from a security standpoint.
SMBv1 is a really old, deprecated, flawed, and insecure, protocol.
Reference: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/
It's also not going to help to deal with Win10 machines which are now defaulting to simply not having SMBv1 installed, those are likely to respond to smbclient -L ... with:
protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET
Failed to connect with SMB1 -- no workgroup available
@Francesco Your original "workaround" is actually a better and safer "answer".
Anyway, please don't force SMBv1 :-)
(this would have been more appropriately posted as a comment, however I lack sufficient reputation to do things "properly".)
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
While setting client max protocol = NT1 will "work" at least when addressing older machines, enabling SMBv1 called NT1 in samba, and forcing its use (which is what this does) is not a good idea from a security standpoint.
SMBv1 is a really old, deprecated, flawed, and insecure, protocol.
Reference: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/
It's also not going to help to deal with Win10 machines which are now defaulting to simply not having SMBv1 installed, those are likely to respond to smbclient -L ... with:
protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET
Failed to connect with SMB1 -- no workgroup available
@Francesco Your original "workaround" is actually a better and safer "answer".
Anyway, please don't force SMBv1 :-)
(this would have been more appropriately posted as a comment, however I lack sufficient reputation to do things "properly".)
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
answered 9 hours ago
Beardy-FaceBeardy-Face
11
11
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Beardy-Face is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1070185%2ffailed-to-retrieve-share-list-from-server-file-already-exists-cant-access-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
See bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1762211 and ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2164517
– Panther
Aug 29 '18 at 16:21
thank you. The workaround in the launchpad bug report works fortunately.
– Francesco Tocci
Aug 30 '18 at 6:46
Post as an answer with a link back to the bug report
– Panther
Aug 30 '18 at 13:40