SMB filesharing on mac (works with windows clients)

I have an old powerbook g4 (2004,) which was my main computer until last year. Apple products are expensive but I think it was pretty worth it’s money. Now I have a Core Duo (2006) macbook and a sweet homebrew core 2 quad pc whose main purpose in life is to fix audacity bugs on windows and make my actions per minute in starcraft higher. It is connected to my sound system so I want to be able to hear my library music from it. Little did I know, this small desire would bring to an epic smb quest.

WIFI is broken on both my new(er) macbook and pc, so I use the old powerbook as a network hub, sharing internet from wifi via ethernet. I want to use it to share files between mac and pc, so I tried using the “Windows File Sharing” option in the Sharing panel, which just boots up an smb server.

However it doesn’t work with PCs and has apparently crappy authentication. There are numerous posts about people trying to set the authentication to ntvlm1 by modifying the smb.conf. I tried this, and many other similar things, to no avail. Then I came across one solution which is to compile and install the latest smb.

It works now after messing with the damn thing for a good 4 or 5 hours. Since there are no obvious other guides on the net for the few folks who want to do this on mac, here are the steps and problems i ran into. You’ll need basic knowledge of the terminal and probably need the xcode developer tools installed to do this.

1. I typed “smb source download” and got version 3.2.6 or so.

Next steps in the terminal
2. Then I cd’d to the directory “source3” in the smb folder and typed

./configure --prefix=/usr;make;sudo make install

-note: there is also “source4”, but i believe this is an unstable branch.
-2nd note: also don’t use –prefix=/sur/local/sbin like some guy on a forum posts says he does because this will end up creating an (additional) sbin and lib directory within /usr/local/sbin.
-note: this takes about 15minutes to half an hour on a slow pc.

3. Now we need to edit the configuration file for smb.
In the terminal type:

emacs /usr/lib/smb.conf

and change

passdb backend = opendirectorysam

(or whatever it is) to

passdb backend = smbpasswd'

4.Above that line add 2 new lines :

smb passwdfile = /usr/lib/samba/smbpass.passwd
security = user

5.I also changed

guess account = unknown


guess account = youruseraccountname

(replace it with your user name of course)

6.Now save with control-x then control-s. quit emacs with control-x control-c

7.Now it’s time to start the client. in the terminal, type

sudo smbd -d

which starts the smb daemon.

8.You now need to add the password (this can only be done when smb is running, apparently.) Type

sudo smbpasswd -a yourmacusername

then enter whatever password you want (This can be different from your mac password.)

9.Connect from your mac/pc. If your ip is, then connect to smb:// On windows you can do this by mapping a network drive when you right click ‘My Computer’. On mac it’s in the ‘go’ menu->connect to server

-note if things don’t work out for you and you want to test and see error messages, use

sudo smb --debug-level=10 -i

if you do this you’ll need to kill it before starting the daemon (and vice versa). You may also need the kill command if smbd hangs.

I have some additional steps because I wanted to share an external USB drive, which is not possible by using symbolic links or mac aliases in your public folder.
to do this:
1.edit smb.conf again and add the lines

comment = extusb
path = /Volumes/My Passport
browseable = yes
read only = no

Replace “My Passport” with the name of your drive.
To access it just go to smb:// (if your ip is and use the same password you provided above.

Then everything pretty much works. The latency is pretty crappy so I had to adjust VLC file cache size to play audio/video well. It’s probably not too hard to configure smb more to handle this, but I’m feeling smbd’d out right now. If someone figures it out thought let me know.

Some last notes:
My smb system was a 1.5ghz g4 on 10.4.11.
My smb clients were a macbook core2duo 2.0 ghz on 10.6.4 and 2.4 gHz Core 2 Quad on Vista x64
I read somewhere on a forum that the smb/opendirectory that comes with your mac is a modified version and not compatible with the newest public smb downloads.
I also kinda sorta know the proper way to handle daemons are with launchctl but I don’t know how to set it up, and I never restart this mac, so I haven’t looked into it.

Listen to your computer: lstn

Lstn is another project I’ve been working on with Institute for Algorhythmics.
It is a program that sonifies real-time debugging data of other programs. If you were interested in the FuckingAudacity or FuckingWebBrowser demos you’ll probably like this one. Those were sonification from the inside out, and lstn is about external sonification:

We sonify opcodes, callstack, and active memory. The sonification of active memory is direct, but sonifying opcodes and callstack info is more tricky to do ‘mostly honestly,’ and we’re still trying to figure it out. The project is still in alpha stage.
You can use lstn to attach to pretty much any program on the mac besides itself.

You can also use lstn to do old-school sonification of chunks of memory (as opposed to jumping around wherever the opcodes go.) The sonification of memory this way has a suprising amount of periodicity in it, creating both tones, and even things like crecendi and decrecendi.

There is built in osc support, but we’re not sure yet what data to send, as my impression is that osc might choke if you send too much stuff at irregular intervals.

I’m hoping to work more on the display to draw a visual map of the memory and program counter and also some tree-like structure for visualizing the callstack.

Another feature to note is the speed control which reduces the speed of the program being attached to. This is important because our ears won’t be able to catch things that happen at rates higher than the sample rate. I hope as the sonification methods become more meaningful that this feature will have more value.

This project started last February, but has only gotten this far because I keep changing OS’s and computers. The program needs different source for each of these combinations, since the opcodes and opcode format for i386, i386_64 and ppc are different. As of right now it works on ppc best and i386 (core duo) pretty well. on ppc you can simultaneously attach to many different processes, but I haven’t gotten that to work on core duo yet.

This project has taught me a lot more about cpu internals and program structure than any other program, (or class for that matter) has given me. So if you’re a programmer and this kind of stuff tickles your whatever, I suggest taking a look at the source and asking me about it. Otherwise just hold on till we get a real release.

sizeof dynamically allocated arrays in c

The MAX(a,b) macro bug I posted last was something I had done before. Today and Yesterday I spent a good few hours running over my old mistakes.

What’s a difference between:

unsigned char *dynArray = malloc(500);
unsigned char trueArray[500];

well, Today’s arrrrrrg is that sizeof (dynArray) is just the size of a pointer, not the size of the array as you would get when doing sizeof(trueArray).

assert(sizeof(dynArray)  == sizeof(unsigned char*));      //ok
assert(sizeof(trueArray) == sizeof(unsigned char) * 500); //ok
assert(sizeof(dynArray)  == sizeof(trueArray));           //fails

It’s likely that you knew this, and I had learned this at one point, and thought ‘hmm, how interesting’ while scratching my chin. But I have obviously forgotten it as I was using sizeof(dynArray) to iterate/initialize my array. I have to give credit to the phrases pointer-array-equivalence and somehow my comfort of using malloc(sizeof(*myPointer)) to confusing me into the conclusion that sizeof(dynArray) would really evaluate to 500. I remember writing that line and saying to myself rather convincingly that this is the right way to get the size of an array. It thus royally sucked debugging the actual code since I tend to start reverting the snippets that I am least convinced of first. But debugging the confusion process is actually quite nice. And now I’m pretty sure I’m not going to do that gotcha again. That’s my consolation sherlock.

Tatsumi Ryusui and Starcraft II and emacs

Over the last year in Berlin I worked on five collaborative music/performance/art projects that I’ve been meaning to post.

In the summer as a part of 48 Stunden Neuk├Âlln I did a collaboration with Tatsumi Ryusui (myspace).

Normally Tatsumi does experimental electronics improvisation and I do computer music or sonification stuff, but we were asked to play something a bit more poppy.

Tatsumi keeps everything real and is always exhibiting the utmost level of radness so I couldn’t pass this opportunity up. (After all, computer musicians secretly or publicly don’t like computer music and are always longing to find some pop outlet side-project to get some console for their self-imposed complexes.) Just kidding. I actually heard someone make this accusation for the general case. I must be still upset to post it here.

Tatsumi in white cow, me in aloha attire (it was friday):

Untitled from Tatsumi Ryusui on Vimeo.

Tatsumi played guitar and sung kayoukyoku, which is kind of between japanese folk and pop.
I made a effects processing program that has the interface inspired by emacs and Starcraft II.

You shouldn’t be freaking out. Starcraft II is a totally legit model for user interface. In general games are to interface as porn was to internet (although I can’t vouch for the correct SAT answer). As a competitive game it requires players to command with accuracy and dexterity while processing a huge amount of input. it is perhaps the most demanding in terms of user actions per minute (clicks, keystrokes). And it is essentially a performance environment, which is why some of the most popular channels are about watching shoutcasts of Starcraft II like Day9, HuskyStarcraft, and HDStarcraft. And not to mention it has a great community that amazingly includes genuinely cool genuinely interested genuinely cute girls like Press Heart To Continue. Yes, my love for starcraft is probably subject to second-hand embarassment. I’m not ashamed, so please learn to deal with it yourself or get in.

In using (text) programming as a medium for composition I often feel the need to be able to incorporate envelopes to control parameters such as volume/etc. This kind of thing the mouse is great for, and we’re pretty good at using it. It is of course imperfect for ‘drawing’ and I suck at ‘drawing’ and drawing to begin with (just how and in supercollider often brings snickers), but if processed correctly has many advantages for providing this need. No one’s saying you have to do a direct motion to parameter mapping. Also, we are all super fucking good at using the mouse now. If you have practiced an instrument and somehow got decent at it, you know how much time it takes. Chances are you spent a comparable amount of time using a mouse. Yet it’s somehow odd to think of it as practice.

Emacs is also great for its key input to do what you want as fast as possible. In general for commands you don’t touch the mouse and just press a combo of keys to execute commands.

The program I made was essentially a large effects box that allowed effect like delay/distortion/phaser/downsampling, mixing, zooming in on buffers, and quick parameter to mouse mapping based on keys/mouse position.
It looked like this:

It was done with OpenFrameworks, a minimal cross-platform C++ framework which I’ve been using in some Institute for Algorhythmics projects.

We’re going to play again on November 14 at Schlessiches Tor. I’ll post an update and info about other projects soon.

Macro blues and function reentry?

Knowing how to macro correctly is important in both the real world (starcraft) and when writing code.

in c you can define useful macros like

#define FFMAX(a,b) ((a) > (b) ? (a) : (b))

. The macros will be a little better than using even static inline functions because no extra memory is allocated for the temporary variables that are implicit in a function like

static inline int max(int a, int b) { return a > b ? a : b; }

But using macros causes, as I found, REEAALLY if-not-hard-stupid-to-find bugs if you are putting expressions with side effects as the macro arguments. If you don’t know, stupid-to-find means you feel increasingly stupid during and after the finding.

I had a function with side effects that was in the macro, and I when I got some strange results I turned to valgrind and gdb to help find the problem. I also added a bunch of printfs. All this told me was that the function was being executed twice on the same line even though I had written it just once, and it wasn’t near a loop. I had gotten so used to ignoring the debugger when it jumps to the MAX(a, b) macro that I didn’t even think to look at the definition, which was of course the root of the problem. The problem is that macros do text substitution on its argument list, and not evaluation as normal functions do. This means that when I called

FFMAX(smallintval, my_side_effecting_function())

it expanded naturally to

((smallintval) > (my_side_effecting_function()) ? (smallintval) : (my_side_effecting_function()))

and caused double side effects to happen instead of the single.
This guy here has explained it much better than I.

The real problem though, is that from watching the debugger jump into the same function twice from the same line, I expected that there was some crazy stack thrashing causing reentry of some sort or some The Matrix-style “deja vu” (what the hell was that about anyway?) So I ran valgrind memcheck on it to of course no avail, because there was no buffer overflows, no memory bashing, no elegant landing on the program counter memcpy mistakes.

I stared and played around with the code for about 8 hours straight; I got it, of course, by then going to sleep and looking at it with a fresh eyes.
Here is a memento screenshot: