GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 110159
Nautitlus smb browser does not give user a second chance to re-enter username/password for smb share.
Last modified: 2004-12-22 21:47:04 UTC
Package: nautilus Severity: normal Version: 2.2.1 Synopsis: Nautitlus smb browser does not give user a second chance to re-enter username/password for smb share. Bugzilla-Product: nautilus Bugzilla-Component: general Description: Description of Problem: Steps to reproduce the problem: 1. Start "Network Servers" browser (that's what it's called on Redhat 9 menu). 2. Viewing the smb network neighborhood, try to access an smb share that asks for a username and password. 3. Enter a bad password so you will be refused access to viewing the smb share. 4. Try to reload the page. You'll get a permissions error message, but you'll never get a second chance to re-enter your username and password! Actual Results: You will get a permissions error message every time. Expected Results: The username/password dialog box should popup, giving you a second chance to re-enter your username and password. How often does this happen? Every time. Additional Information: ------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2003-04-07 01:57 ------- The original reporter (chris-gnome-bug@potamus.org) of this bug does not have an account here. Reassigning to the exporter, unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org. Reassigning to the default owner of the component, nautilus-maint@bugzilla.gnome.org.
This has bothered me as well. I've done a simple search for a few bugs to try to find a duplicate. The closest I came up with was bug 106722, which is about several user-interface issues with accessing smb shares in nautilus. Setting version->2.2.x, setting severity->major & priority->high (I feel forced to use the command-line since this won't work), adding GNOMEVER2.2 keyword, and marking as new.
This potentially looks like a duplicate of bug 84647 and looks related to bugs 106722 and bug 114570.
Doh! That's suppose to be bug 86467 not 84647. See also the extra comments I added to bug 86467.
Is this still the case?
Duplicate of 105714 which is resolved. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 105714 ***