For example, let’s say someone calls into the helpdesk and says they are having issues connecting to the network. They may be able to tell you where they were and when they were having the issues, but they don’t know for sure.
Text default signingrequired=no SMB as provided by Server 2008R2 is a losing game with Mac OS X clients, there is only so much you can do, and performance will probably not meet most requirements or expectations. With Mac OS X interacting with Windows Server SMB (again, for 10.10 and higher, ideally Server2012R2), you need to make the following change on your Windows Server, via Powershell (elevated/as admin). This did not appear to have much (if any) effect with Server2008R2, so Server2012R2 may be a requirement.
Sorry I meant Acronis was job done applied to 99% of people. I think I probably post a response once a week to someone reporting performance issues with Macs on Windows SMB shares;-) There is another route you could look at The issue is with Macs on Windows shares, you could deploy a Samba on.Nix solution for the home shares.
A lot of work was done with Samba to resolve Mac connectivity issues after v4.2 and the implementation of the updated vfsfruit module. This is a real SMB solution and closer to what we used to use in very high performance Mac server solutions in the late 1990s and early 2000s when Xinet sold KA Share on Solaris and SGI. Unfortunately this is one of those nasty Apple and Windows issues that are the bane of the average Mac Admins life. The core issue is that whilst Apple fully support SMB they don't fully support SMB on a Windows server because there is a well documented bug in Finder and Windows shares So the answer is to use Acronis and job done We don't use anything other than AFP apart from people in IT that need limited access to Windows shares for copying an ISO or dropping a file to somewhere and understand the issues/workarounds Cant help you on the network home shares however, we forbid saving anything locally and users are all smart enough to know IT wont backup anything unless it on the server.
Well smart maybe the wrong word. If you are using the network home share for saving small files life preferences, specific action files from Adobe apps etc then I wouldn't see an issue, its when you start using SMB on a Windows share for 'real' files that the problems arise.
Toby wells wrote: There are some very niche options as well, these are solutions for people in specific Mac creative service roles, things like FinalCut Pro and Pre media Publishing SAN MP Helios EtherShare Niche indeed!:-) When I'm reminded of Helios, I'm reminded of how I helped migrate a very large printing company away from Helios, many many years ago now. It was rather expensive, and it stored Apple files in a wholly proprietary format. If a company is comfortable with that kind of really serious amount of lock-in, then yes it can be an option with good performance. I found them a bit too fond of finger-pointing at Apple anytime an issue arose.
San MP looks like a great option for the right environment. Toby wells wrote: I was no fan of Helios, similarly spent a lot of time moving people off it, mainly to Xinet FullPress but sadly they were gobbled up and the whole area of OPI became a bit of technology legacy At the time Xinet made the fastest AFP implementation around and sold it for Solaris and Irix (showing my age now) as KA Share which was mind-blowingly expensive but very fast Xinet FullPress. Excellent yes, but very expensive. I think the print company moved from Helios to Xinet then to native-Apple file-sharing circa 10.2.
Andrew7932 wrote: Thanks David. Am I to understand from this that with Server 2012 and the configuration that you have suggested that Access Connect is not as necessary or would you still recommend Access Connect for a 2012 environment too? I don't think it's reasonable or appropriate for anyone here to 'answer' that for you, because your environment ≠ our environment. Rather, the best thing to do is a proper trial. But if you're using network homes, you might need to migrate Macs to portable home directories (please investigate) - without the built-in syncing settings & mechanism, as at this time it seems that a better route is a custom solution for syncing users' homes to the server. Not really all that hard via the built-in rsync. Jameel9683 wrote: Has anyone had experience with using SMB between OS X 10.11 OS X 10.11?
For example if I had a iMac (client) running OS X 10.11, and a Mac Pro (server) running OS X 10.11 with OS X Server 5. Does anyone have experience using SMB in a similar config? Not helpful at all but my question is why? You have AFP available on both ends. I have Server 5 running and some Mac 10.11 clients connecting to it but I have never forced them to connect via SMB because AFP is native. I'm curious why you would want to do that? Andrew7932 wrote: Jameel9683 wrote: Has anyone had experience with using SMB between OS X 10.11 OS X 10.11?
![Network Network](/uploads/1/2/5/6/125629161/947101989.png)
For example if I had a iMac (client) running OS X 10.11, and a Mac Pro (server) running OS X 10.11 with OS X Server 5. Does anyone have experience using SMB in a similar config?
Not helpful at all but my question is why? You have AFP available on both ends. I have Server 5 running and some Mac 10.11 clients connecting to it but I have never forced them to connect via SMB because AFP is native. I'm curious why you would want to do that? There is a bug in OS X 10.11, confirmed by Acronis and Apple, where you cannot configure OS X 10.11 to use AFP with network homes, when bound to Active Directory. Well you can configure the Mac to do this as the option is still present, but when configured you cannot login with a domain account, therefore AFP is not an option for me until Apple fix the bug, if they ever do.
Just wondered if anyone has used SMB between OS X 10.11 machines, in production environments yet. Mikeit3 wrote: Hi Jameel I've been following all your posts as I'm I'm virtually the same scenario. Have you made any progress in the last few days? Thanks Nope, no progress! I'm losing the will to live with Macs!
Apple don't seem to care about this bug, as it's been present since the first release of 10.11, and they still have not fixed it in the past 3 releases. And Acronis cannot help any more on this, as it is a problem with OS X, not the Acronis software.:( Sam can you escalate this? Your senior developers know, although cannot get much sense out of Apple.
Radar bug 22691458. Andrew7932 wrote back: As someone who is considering but yet to make moves to deploy Macs on a Windows network and has been getting by just fine without them so far, can someone tell me its reliable or worth the effort, despite the various issues and seemingly absent support from Apple in this space?
What lack of support? I just migrated a senior official at a company to a Mac laptop at his request, (after years of being Windows-PC only, but recently having tried a co-worker's Apple laptop and preferring it). Server is 2012R2, issues have been negligible, given the established workflow. What are your specific needs relative to this thread? Andrew7932 wrote: As someone who is considering but yet to make moves to deploy Macs on a Windows network and has been getting by just fine without them so far, can someone tell me its reliable or worth the effort, despite the various issues and seemingly absent support from Apple in this space?
Unless you have a real need for macs, and have sufficient mac knowledge, I would stay clear of macs! Macs work very well on their own, and are most suited with local storage. Macs are great, as long as you don't need to access network storage, as you would on the windows side. Yes they can work over networks, and when done right they are great; although unless you have the time/knowledge to get them integrated into a windows network, I wouldn't bother. Just my opinion. Jameel9683 wrote: Macs are great, as long as you don't need to access network storage, as you would on the windows side.
Yes they can work over networks, and when done right they are great False with regards to accessing network storage. We could instead say 'Server 2008 and earlier and many NAS vendors provide extremely poor support for non-Windows clients,' which is another way of looking at it;-) In other words: If someone as an admin is tasked with supporting any platform that isn't Windows, it can be great if you do the necessary work. If one instead waits for the non-Windows platform to behave just like Windows with otherwise Windows-only devices - or 3rd-party devices that have done nothing either to accommodate the non-Windows platform in question - then there will be problems. DavidCSG wrote: Jameel9683 wrote: Macs are great, as long as you don't need to access network storage, as you would on the windows side.
Yes they can work over networks, and when done right they are great False with regards to accessing network storage. We could instead say 'Server 2008 and earlier and many NAS vendors provide extremely poor support for non-Windows clients,' which is another way of looking at it;-) In other words: If someone as an admin is tasked with supporting any platform that isn't Windows, it can be great if you do the necessary work. If one instead waits for the non-Windows platform to behave just like Windows with otherwise Windows-only devices - or 3rd-party devices that have done nothing either to accommodate the non-Windows platform in question - then there will be problems.
That is an interesting way of looking at it, although most networks that have Apple macs in are primarily windows networks; the domain controllers are normally Windows, the Mail Exchanges are normally Windows, the primary File server is normally windows or at least presented through Windows. Yes you do get companies that are purely mac that authenticate through OD, and have a '3rd party' NAS devices or something else, and maybe use Linux for their Mail Exchange, although I would be confident to say that the majority of people who read this thread have 'Windows Networks'.
Libusb rebuild fine configure/make/make install work great. Build of my code was also straight forward with llvm its just debugging my own code and potentially inside libusb with eclipse/gdb that is more problematic. I think i could use xcode to debug or some trick exist to get gdb/eclipse back in 10.10 but that' not so convenient and may be painful to put in place. Still i do not even know where to start looking at on the mac back-end. View this message in context: Sent from the LibUSB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Attachments: I'm using latest libusb from github rebuilt and installed locally host H/W is a macbook pro intel core i5 OSX 10.6.8 (SnowLeopard) uname -a say 'darwin 10.8.0' My FS device (STM32F4) is making high use of short packet (up and downstream) to bound protocol bulk message typically what is done host send a operation request to device by sending 1 to n FS 64 byte packet down to Bulk Out Ep-1 (ended by a short packet) device answer with data/status back to that on Bulk-EP1-In with 1 to n FS packet last one being short (. On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 4:41 AM, diabolo wrote: I'm using latest libusb from github rebuilt and installed locally host H/W is a macbook pro intel core i5 OSX 10.6.8 (SnowLeopard) uname -a say 'darwin 10.8.0' Mac OS X10.8.0 is not 10.6.8. What is the OS version you are using? If you are using 10.8.0, please at least upgrade your machine to the latest version 10.8.5 to see if that helps.
There is a possibility that the bug is in the OS and not libusb. Actually you can even upgrade to Mac OS X 10.9 and 10.10 for free. 2015-07-28 12:31 GMT+02:00 Xiaofan Chen: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 4:52 PM, michel wrote: Apple dropped gcc/gdb support so i'm not quite abble to debug anythings on 10.10:( I believe you can still use gcc to build, not using Apple's clang based fake gcc though, but rather the real gcc.I am not so sure about gdb. On 10.10 gcc is a wrapper for LLVM: $ gcc -version Configured with: -prefix=/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/usr -with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c/4.2.1 Apple LLVM version 6.1.0 (clang-602.0.53) (based on LLVM 3.6.0svn) Target: x8664-apple-darwin14.4.0 Thread model: posix gdb is replaced by lldb, the LLVM debugger.
Lldb do not have the same commands than gdb. You can also build libusb using Xcode and the provided Xcode project in the Xcode subdirectory. Ludovic Rousseau.
Libusb rebuild fine configure/make/make install work great. Build of my code was also straight forward with llvm its just debugging my own code and potentially inside libusb with eclipse/gdb that is more problematic. I think i could use xcode to debug or some trick exist to get gdb/eclipse back in 10.10 but that' not so convenient and may be painful to put in place.
Still i do not even know where to start looking at on the mac back-end. View this message in context: Sent from the LibUSB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.