Windows can see share, cannot access it [Solved]

[FullScale4Me]

and the other thing I noticed is that the mx-samba config utility does not appear to write anything to smb.conf. That would seem to imply it is not used, in which case maybe you should perhaps consider removing or concealing it to avoid anything going wrong there

The MX-Samba config utility in its help file mentions the share configurations are stored elsewhere.

The /etc/samba/smb.config file is used by most of the core Samba utilities supplied by Samba.org for the running of the Samba services.

There is ZERO reason since the MX-Samba config utility was created for 99% of MX end users to edit that file. There are a few old device exceptions for editing it in that one percent, a few end up there after reading internet documents focused on other distros.

Editing smb.config almost always gives a SLOWER and MUCH less secure Samba (by not using Samba 2.x or Samba 3.x). In a few cases in recent threads here it totally broke Samba, even though "testparm" was happy to say all was OK.

[nomad]

Wow! Didn't take CharlesV long to start waving his new powers around.

[Antediluvian]

Wow! Didn't take CharlesV long to start waving his new powers around.

What didn't take long to show up was the OP's bad attitude. I am often impressed with the patience of the advisers on this forum.

[MXRobo]

ditto

[Eadwine Rose]

As this issue is solved I am throwing the lock on this topic. If the issue is not solved in hindsight, OP can send me a pm asking me to reopen.

[x-user]

Since @Eadwine Rose has seen fit to lock my earlier thread no doubt having seen me logged in drafting a response to @Antediluvian here it is:

Attitude is in the eye of the beholder, my new interjecting friend.

What is an objective fact is that the system info would have contributed diddly squat to debugging the ufw issue. Also that in searching threads for other problems I certainly didn't see the system info having been proffered or demanded; one attitude for all seemingly not the custom here.

While I'm at it, let me add that a big part of the reason for my gripe was the forum practice of confining support threads to one issue per user, which I will in the interests of refraining from pejorative language confine myself to describing as suboptimal.

The atomisation of debugging support creates a universe of similarly themed and unsearchable support threads and ensures there is a fragmentation of support. As I see it that simply makes forum threads unusable for the majority of users and creates much more unnecessary work for mods and those trying to help. Very, very suboptimal

[Eadwine Rose]

Topics merged, we do not open new topics when one has been locked. You could have asked to reopen.

Thank you for your input on the forum mechanics issues.

As your problem has been solved, from what I can see in your writing, I am relocking this topic.