> so share 'em with HTTP :)

RG> That'll only be half a solution. Sure it'll give me a(nother)
RG> means of playing the MP's, but the idea of having them in a
RG> shared folder accessable by all of our machines is (also) so
RG> that if more MP's are d/loaded they can be placed *directly*
RG> into this same folder regardless of which machine is being used
RG> to d/load them.

 That's exactly what I'm trying to do with my Windows files, but I'm
trying to be greedy and boot windows on the Linux machine, runnign a
Windows-Windows network as well. My problem si that I can't find a way
to give Linux users access to the Windows files on its own machine
(and hence access to the network). So far, only root has write-access
to those files,and when I try to give users write access, I get a
message saying I don't have sufficinet access to do that.

RG> SMB really is the most convenient method I've found, and when
RG> it works (which is MOST of the time) it works well. Even so, I
RG> still wouldn't in any way call it 'fabulous' (as Bob was
RG> apparently told). NFS shares are MUCH more reliable/stable.

 I hate to tell you... but you're doing something wrong. I am
*really* good at finding flaws and stuffing things up. So far, I've
managed to lock the Windows network fairly reliably, but I can't stuff
Samba. I've already copied a *huge* file (2.5Gb... it seemed like a
good way to stuff the system), I've run a 2.5Gb backup ascross the SMB
network, I've loaded a shitty little thing called LinNeighbourhood
meant to imitate Network Neighborhood at the Linux end (and I locked
it up pretty easily), but Samba kept on truckin'.

 It's fabulous!

 But the bloke who wrote the manuals needs urgent psychiatric care.

Regards,
Bob
   

--- BQWK Alpha 0.5