i believe that what my problem is...

on windows, when i try to browse "entire network" i get a message simply saying that i am unable to do so; however i can go into run or explorer and explicitly give the name of a linux share and browse it with no problems

i have noticed that sometimes i can see the specific computers and sometimes i can't; it seems quite random; running the gui tool smb4k does not even display my workgroup name! so nothing is browsable from the workgroup except when a share is directly stated

i have tried several options, including the preferred master, domain master, and local master, and combinations of those; i have tried the security options user, share, domain, and server with no luck; i only have 1 broadcast interface, so i know i'm bound to the right interface...

why am i not able to browse my network? here is my smb.conf file:

# Samba config file created using SWAT
# from 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1)
# Date: 2004/04/10 14:43:43

# Global parameters
[global]
workgroup = MSHOME
browseable = yes
# null passwords = Yes
# preferred master = yes
# domain master = yes
security = USER
os level = 33
log level = 3
ldap ssl = no
encrypt passwords = yes
smb passwd file = /etc/samba/private/smbpasswd
valid users = jib, bob
hosts allow = 192.168.0.2, 192.168.0.3, 192.168.0.5
printing = cups

[homes]
comment = Home Directories
read only = No
create mask = 0750
browseable = No

[public]
comment = Public Stuff
path = /mnt/2winData
public = yes
writable = yes
printable = no
# read only = No

[printers]
comment = All Printers
path = /var/spool/samba
printable = Yes
browseable = No

Could your browsable=no option be the problem under homes. When you ping from windows, can you ping by hostname or do you have to use the IP address to get a reply?

no, it is not browseable options; and i use the ip in order to ping

here is an interesting development: using smb4k, i did a search for mshome (my workgroup) and different times i would see that 192.168.0.2 is being called mshome and sometimes 192.168.0.3 is being called mshome...

correct me if i'm wrong, but is the workgroup supposed to be identified to a computer? both those ip's are two different computers on my network... i don't know if my computer is the one that is supposed to be called mshome...

strange indeed... i'm using samba 3.02a btw

Usually your windows pc's are all identified by a single workgroup name, and unique computer names which is also the hostnames. Also, You should be able to ping each of your windows PC's by ip address or by hostname (computer name). So if you workgroup name is "mshome" what are the computer names (hostnames) of the two windows boxes ?

old is gold...

i reverted back to samba 2.28a (latest samba 2.0 series) and everything seems to be fine now; though i haven't touched anything from the default security settings now, i am concluding that my problem was just a quirk with the samba version i was using before (3.02a)

although the same strangeness is happening like described in my previous post (the workgroup mshome is being called a computer according to smb4k), it hasn't affected samba's functionality and i am able to successfully browse the network and see the workgroup like normal though network neighborhood on windows 98 and windows me machines

thanks for your time, explorer

here is my smb.conf file (that does work normally, no matter in what order computers are turned on, with printer loading and homes directory loading, but no specified secure options) using samba 2.28a

# Samba config file created using SWAT
# from localhost (127.0.0.1)
# Date: 2004/04/10 20:30:39

# Global parameters
[global]
workgroup = MSHOME
encrypt passwords = Yes
null passwords = Yes
log level = 3
os level = 33
preferred master = Yes
printing = cups

[homes]
comment = Home Directories
read only = No
create mask = 0750
browseable = No

[public]
comment = Public Stuff
path = /mnt/2winData
read only = No
guest ok = Yes

[printers]
comment = All Printers
path = /var/spool/samba
printable = Yes
browseable = No

I've been using samba 2.2 since it first came out and have never had a problem. Never have used 3.x. I'm glad you got it working and that's what's important.