Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #56661 > unrolled thread

What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-14 17:24 +0000
    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-10-17 01:06 +0100
      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 16:26 +0000
        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-18 18:13 +0000
          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 19:59 +0000
            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-18 20:42 +0000
              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 21:55 +0000
            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2018-10-19 23:04 -0500
              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-10-20 00:37 -0400
                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-21 19:20 +0000
                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-10-21 16:42 -0400
                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-21 22:47 +0000
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-22 13:51 +0000
                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2018-10-22 16:44 +0200
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-22 17:21 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2018-10-22 21:43 +0200
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 20:44 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 12:10 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 16:16 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:21 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 20:51 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-23 16:54 -0400
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-23 23:09 +0200
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-24 02:47 +0200
                                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-24 10:35 +0000
                                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-24 17:25 +0200
                                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-24 15:50 +0000
                                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2018-10-25 17:49 -0500
                                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-26 01:24 +0000
                                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-27 07:32 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 20:37 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 15:58 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:46 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:52 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 22:55 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 00:37 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-23 12:55 +0200
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 12:10 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 14:11 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:36 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 19:15 +0000
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 21:44 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 21:07 +0000
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-02 19:05 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-03 02:00 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-03 15:09 +0000
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2018-10-22 18:56 +0100
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 03:37 +0000
    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? arlen holder <arlen@arlen.com> - 2019-01-21 01:30 +0000

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#56808

On 23 Oct 2018 16:16:07 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   No, AFAIK the portmapping issue is not solved and - AFAIK - getting a
> SMB server on non-rooted Android to work - i.e. even with a port higher
> than 1024 - is not solved yet.

While we've solved a lot of common problems in this thread...
there is far much more for intelligent people to improve:
1. There is no working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
2. There is no known freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

I have confidence that I will eventually solve both those problems (as I
almost never fail), but it won't be easy; and it will likely take a few
golden nuggets of knowledge from the intelligent adults on this newsgroup
to do so.

>   To be fair, I think he actually does both, i.e. does some research and
> 'expects' others to do the rest. In some cases , the research part is
> minimal to (nearly) absent. In other cases, there's quite a bit of
> research, but the prresentation is ... ummm .. 'sub-optimal'. :-)

What Frank Slootweg wrote is correct in that I do a lot more research than
the likes of proven morons such as Rudy Wieser can _ever_ comprehend; but,
it's also true that I ask questions when solutions that may exist are
unknown to me.

Each nugget of knowledge helps move our capabilities forward.

For an example of where we each provide knowledge nuggets that help each
other move the ball forward, Frank was the first to inform me that NetDrive
wasn't always payware, which helped me find the older version that was
freeware which easily mounted FTP shares over WiFi as drive letters.

Likewise, Frank said that I was the first to post on these newsgroups about
FTPUse freeware, which he hadn't known about until I found it in my
searches for replacing "net use" years ago for mounting FTP shares over
WiFi as drive letters.

The problem with people like Rudy Wieser is that they contain literally
zero of those knowledge nuggets.

>   The main problem is his MO when interacting with people who he
> 'disagrees' with for some strange 'reason's. He tries to justify that
> MO, but before you know it, he again draws first blood and things go
> down hill with lightning speed.

Frank Slootweg - we have been down this path too many times.
I repeat that you have no concept of two things:

1. USENET MODEL:
o Not everyone is on Usenet for idle chitchat.
o Some of us are here to solve tough problems

2. INTELLIGENT ADULTS:
o My strategy is to openly alienate worthless child-like posters
o I do that by being a mirror to funnel them into acting like adults

You know I've done that with you Frank, so I won't belabor the obvious.

You act as if it's the policeman's fault that he has to pull over someone
who habitually drives on the shoulder, horns blaring, to avoid traffic.

My response is *never* what you call 'first blood'; you're just ignorant of
the obvious where you blame the police for having to arrest the bank robber
after they've robbed the bank a dozen times already.

>   I've been in and out of his bad/good books several times. Now I'm
> again in his good book and get praised like there's no tomorrow. But
> some day in the not too distant future, I'm sure I'll be 'vermin', a
> 'moron', etc. again.

Frank Slootweg,
You just _proved_ you have absolutely no concept of a funnel & a mirror:
o The strategy is to funnel people into acting like adults
o The tactic is to use a mirror of their own posts to do so

To wit:
o When you act like a child, Frank Slootweg, I treat you as a child.
o When you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult.

It's a well-thought out strategy whose tactics support the strategy.
If you haven't figured this out by now, after having explained it to you so
many times already, you'll _never_ figure this out, Frank.

All you see is that sometimes I treat you like a child, while other times I
treat you as an adult.

What you don't see, is that I am a mirror of your posts, Frank. 
A mirror.

>   Exactly! I wonder if he even realizes this consequence of his MO.

What's hilarious is that Rudy Wieser actually thinks that by alienating
him, we on this newsgroup, somehow (I can't explain how???) lose out?

We _gain_ a ton when the likes of Rudy Wieser *don't* post to a thread!

Folks like Rudy Wieser, Char Jackson, Wolf K, Rene Lamantagne, and a host
of others, don't have the mental capacity to add value to an adult topic.

For example, ask any of those what solution they'd propose to:
o Solve the non-root SMB drive-mounting question over WiFi
o Solve the non-payware MTP drive-mounting question over WiFi

I'm confident that I _can_ (possibly) solve those two problems, with the
help of the experts here ... but those trolls? No way. 

They've proven long ago that all they _can_ do, is troll.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/eONWlmNhhPU/_sw2o0_xAgAJ>

*Who are the vermin that infest this newsgroup with their trolls?*
o *Rudy Wieser* [From: "R.Wieser" <address@not.available>]
o *Ken Blake* [From: Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>]
o *Wolf K* [From: Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca>]
o *Danny DeVito* [From: Danny DeVito <invalid@invalid.invalid>]
o *Char Jackson* [From: Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>]
o *Sam Hill* [From: Sam Hill <sam@example.com>]
o *joe* [From: joe <none@domain.invalid>]
o *Good Guy* [From: Good Guy <Hello.World@Example.com>]

The _less_ these worthless vermin post, the _more_ we can move forward.

>   Oops, sorry, didn't want to offend you by implying that you might be
> so stupid as to have 10, let alone run it! :-)

While I've solved _many_ a difficult problem, with the help of intelligent
people here, the sad fact is that the vermin listed above will _never_
solve any difficult problem. 

All the people like Rudy Wieser _can_ do, is troll.

Ask any of them, for example, what's _their_ solution for:
1. A working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
2. A freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56813

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> wrote:
> On 23 Oct 2018 16:16:07 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]
> >   The main problem is his MO when interacting with people who he
> > 'disagrees' with for some strange 'reason's. He tries to justify that
> > MO, but before you know it, he again draws first blood and things go
> > down hill with lightning speed.
> 
> Frank Slootweg - we have been down this path too many times.

  Indeed, *you* have been down this path too many times.

  You *try* to justify your behaviour, but *nobody* - absolutely nobody
- is buying your justification.

  So until there's actually someone who *is* buying your justification
and *says* so, cut the crap.

[Crap deleted.]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56814

In article <pqo8lo.duo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> > >   The main problem is his MO when interacting with people who he
> > > 'disagrees' with for some strange 'reason's. He tries to justify that
> > > MO, but before you know it, he again draws first blood and things go
> > > down hill with lightning speed.
> > 
> > Frank Slootweg - we have been down this path too many times.
> 
>   Indeed, *you* have been down this path too many times.
> 
>   You *try* to justify your behaviour, but *nobody* - absolutely nobody
> - is buying your justification.
> 
>   So until there's actually someone who *is* buying your justification
> and *says* so, cut the crap.
> 
> [Crap deleted.]

now look what you've done. earlier today you were his bff. not anymore!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56818

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 16:54:30 -0400, nospam wrote:

> now look what you've done. earlier today you were his bff. not anymore!

Hi nospam,

I see you prove you can't add a single iota of added value:
1. What is a working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
2. What is a freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

You, like Frank, both only comprehend what appears to be capricious to you,
sort of like how someone who can't comprehend quantum mechanics feels that
the state of Shroedingers' cat is capricious.
o When you act like a child, nospam, I treat you as a child
o When you act like an adult, nospam, I treat you as an adult

Since you prove you own the mind of a child, you can't _comprehend_ that.

If it seems I'm trying to alienate you, nospam, as the worthless vermin
that you prove to me, then you'd be correct.

*You know why I can very safely alienate you worthless vermin, nospam?*

HINT: What's the answer to the question below?
1. What is your working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
2. What is your freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56819

On 23 Oct 2018 20:51:44 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   Indeed, *you* have been down this path too many times.
> 
>   You *try* to justify your behaviour, but *nobody* - absolutely nobody
> - is buying your justification.
> 
>   So until there's actually someone who *is* buying your justification
> and *says* so, cut the crap.

Hi Frank Slootweg,
You made an incorrect statement akin to:
o The cops keep giving me speeding tickets for doing nothing

I explained why your statement is only the 2nd half of the picture.
o You speed first
o Then the cops give you a speeding ticket

You just proved that you don't comprehend that concept.
I knew that you don't comprehend it since you proved it in the prior post.

SO that's now _twice_ in series that you proved you don't comprehend
o A bank robber _first_ robs the bank
o Only after the bank robber robs the bank, do the police arrest him

What you only see is the arrest.
You don't see the bank robbery.

I've proved this to you many times, Frank Slootweg, where all I have to do
to prove it is point to your own posts.
o When you act like a child, Frank, I treat you as a child
o When you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult

You only see how I treat you - you never see that it's a *mirror* of your
actions, just as nospam will never see that I treat him (and everyone else)
exactly the same way.

You can't see when you rob the bank, Frank.
You blamed the police for your conviction on bank robbery, Frank.

You've done this so many times that I can predict you will continue it.
Hence, you prove every time that you don't comprehend what a mirror is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56815

On 23/10/2018 21.21, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 23 Oct 2018 16:16:07 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
>>   No, AFAIK the portmapping issue is not solved and - AFAIK - getting a
>> SMB server on non-rooted Android to work - i.e. even with a port higher
>> than 1024 - is not solved yet.
> 
> While we've solved a lot of common problems in this thread...
> there is far much more for intelligent people to improve:
> 1. There is no working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
> 2. There is no known freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB
> 
> I have confidence that I will eventually solve both those problems (as I
> almost never fail), but it won't be easy; and it will likely take a few
> golden nuggets of knowledge from the intelligent adults on this newsgroup
> to do so.
> 
>>   To be fair, I think he actually does both, i.e. does some research and
>> 'expects' others to do the rest. In some cases , the research part is
>> minimal to (nearly) absent. In other cases, there's quite a bit of
>> research, but the prresentation is ... ummm .. 'sub-optimal'. :-)
> 
> What Frank Slootweg wrote is correct in that I do a lot more research than
> the likes of proven morons such as Rudy Wieser can _ever_ comprehend; but,
> it's also true that I ask questions when solutions that may exist are
> unknown to me.

Lot of whatever deleted. If you keep commenting on how stupid or clever
is somebody, or if somebody is an adult or a child, I stop reading.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56817

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 23:09:30 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> Lot of whatever deleted. If you keep commenting on how stupid or clever
> is somebody, or if somebody is an adult or a child, I stop reading.

Hi Carlos E.R.,

Perfect!
You're _finally_ comprehending the obvious!

It's perhaps likely that I've solved more difficult problems in the past
year than you've _ever_ solved in your entire life, Carlos E.R.

At least based on what your lack of added value seems to indicate.

Since you have no added value, I want to alienate you, Carlos E.R.
And you prove time and again to have no added value.

Please just go away, Carlos.
Because you can't add _any_ added value to the problem set.

You just can't.
You prove it in every post.

So by going away, you're doing _exactly_ what I ask you do to.
Which benefits _everyone_.

The less you post your worthless drivel, the more we can find the one or
two people out of 1000 who actually can improve our knowledge.

To wit, the unanswered questions remain:
1. What is a working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
2. What is a freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56821

On 24/10/2018 00.23, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 23:09:30 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> 
>> Lot of whatever deleted. If you keep commenting on how stupid or clever
>> is somebody, or if somebody is an adult or a child, I stop reading.
> 
> Hi Carlos E.R.,
> 
> Perfect!
> You're _finally_ comprehending the obvious!
> 
> It's perhaps likely that I've solved more difficult problems in the past
> year than you've _ever_ solved in your entire life, Carlos E.R.
> 
> At least based on what your lack of added value seems to indicate.
> 
> Since you have no added value, I want to alienate you, Carlos E.R.
> And you prove time and again to have no added value.
> 
> Please just go away, Carlos.
> Because you can't add _any_ added value to the problem set.
> 
> You just can't.
> You prove it in every post.
> 
> So by going away, you're doing _exactly_ what I ask you do to.
> Which benefits _everyone_.
> 
> The less you post your worthless drivel, the more we can find the one or
> two people out of 1000 who actually can improve our knowledge.


Blah blah blah. Insults ignored.

> 
> To wit, the unanswered questions remain:
> 1. What is a working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi
> 2. What is a freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB

I don't care. :-P


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56824

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 02:47:42 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> I don't care. :-P

The only thing that matters, really, to further our tribal knowledge, is:
o A general solution to run any Windows command on Android over USB 
o And freeware to mount Android as a drive letter over WiFi using SMB

Those are the remaining open questions that are on topic for this thread.
Anything else is a waste of all our time, including yours and mine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56825

On 24/10/2018 12.35, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 02:47:42 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> I don't care. :-P
> 
> The only thing that matters, really, to further our tribal knowledge, is:
> o A general solution to run any Windows command on Android over USB 
> o And freeware to mount Android as a drive letter over WiFi using SMB
> 
> Those are the remaining open questions that are on topic for this thread.
> Anything else is a waste of all our time, including yours and mine.
> 

Then, PLEASE! No insults! Keep to the problem.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56826

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 17:25:22 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> Then, PLEASE! No insults! Keep to the problem.

I completely understand your request Carlos, because I am a mirror.
I mirror your posts in an attempt to funnel you into being an adult.

You don't seem to comprehend, even now, the simple concept of a *mirror*.

*Every response you hate, simply points out what _you_ wrote.*
o If you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult
o If you act like a child, I treat you as a child

What you're asking show you think like a child does:
1. You first rob the bank.
2. Then you complain that the newspaper points that out.

All I'm doing, Carlos, is pointing out what people write.
o If what they write is useful, I thank them
o If what they write is childish, I point that out

It's a mirror, Carlos.
A funnel, Carlos.

If someone posts childish drivel that just wastes everyone's time, 
you don't want me to point that out to the poster. I completely 
understand you Carlos. I really do. 

You don't understand me.
o My strategy is to funnel you into acting like an adult
* My tactics include mirroring your posts as proof of your own actions

Moving forward as always, this morning I tested another FTP freeware
share-mounting app, last updated a decade ago, which didn't report errors,
but which didn't work either, so it's a flop.
o Screenshot <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4023721dir025.jjpg.jpg>
o FTPDrive 3.5 <http://www.killprog.com/fdrve.html>
o Saved to: C:\software\network\ftp\ftpdrive
o Checksum of:
  Name: FDinst.exe
  Size: 219159 bytes (0 MB)
  SHA256: E04B3FFD271A005E10A30E0744D1202E0A4910579975AAD8128B53AE5B4E126A
o It wants to go into C:\Program Files (x86)\KillSoft\FtpDrive
o I installed to: C:\app\network\ftp\ftpdrive
o Executable: C:\app\network\ftp\ftpdrive\FtpDrive.exe

The FTPDrive 3.5 executable created a drive letter, X:, but, the
contents of that drive were empty. So it was a flop as tested.

If someone else could test FTPDrive out, and if it works for them, 
(particularly if they use default paths), then that would add 
yet another FTP-share-mounting solution to the Windows/Android
cross-platform tribal knowledge.

The goal, always, is a universal solution for everyone.
(I already have _plenty_ of solutions for myself.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56832

>> The only thing that matters, really, to further our tribal knowledge, is:

>> o And freeware to mount Android as a drive letter over WiFi using SMB

Total Commander - file manager (Android)
http://bit.ly/2Ri0xMU
free, SMBv2 support, no ads, requires plugins, busy and unintuitive
interface

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56835

On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:49:57 -0500, M.L. wrote:

>>> The only thing that matters, really, to further our tribal knowledge, is:
> 
>>> o And freeware to mount Android as a drive letter over WiFi using SMB
> 
> Total Commander - file manager (Android)
> http://bit.ly/2Ri0xMU
> free, SMBv2 support, no ads, requires plugins, busy and unintuitive
> interface

Ooooh. At this late stage in the Usenet thread, I had no longer expected
any more potentially helpful posts, so I very much *appreciate* that you
are the 1 in 1,000 who can help us move the ball forward on these two open
questions:
o *A general solution to run any Windows command on Android over USB*
o *Non-root freeware mounting Android as a drive letter on WiFi using SMB*

Usually, if the advice doesn't come in the first couple of days, it's never
going to arrive as nobody knows the answer.

I've used "Total Commander" before as a file manager, and I "think" we
covered it when we covered SMB, so it will be interesting if it can work
with non-root Android phones.

I downloaded version 2.91 from Google Play (since I didn't have an APK):
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.android.TotalCommander>

Being non-root, I didn't see _any_ SMB commands in the main GUI, 
so I hit the "add plugins" button which took me to
 <https://www.ghisler.com/androidplugins/googleplay>

Where I see free plugins for:
o FTP <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.FTP>
o Google Drive <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.drive>
 SMB <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.LAN>
 SFTP <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.SFTP>
 DropBox <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.totaldrip>
 WebDAV <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.WebDAV>
 Android-to-Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.wifitransfer>
 OneDrive <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.WindowsLive>
 USB <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.paragon.tcplugins_ntfs_ro>

I will check out the SMB plugin:
 <https://www.ghisler.com/androidplugins/download/>
Which, outside of Google Play, is here:
 <http://totalcommander.ch/aplg/tcandroidlan306.apk>

Thanks for suggesting Total Commander with the SMB plugin, as it takes
nuggets of information from the 1 out of 1,000 people on this ng to move
the combined tribal knowledge forward for everyone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56865

On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 01:24:50 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:

> Thanks for suggesting Total Commander with the SMB plugin, as it takes
> nuggets of information from the 1 out of 1,000 people on this ng to move
> the combined tribal knowledge forward for everyone.

Bummer. 

I tested the SMB plugin to Total Commander, which seemed to be a flop.
o It appears to be an SMB "client", not an SMB server.
o That makes all the difference in the world.

Looking at the reviews, I saw the same errors everyone else saw.
o Even so, it was trying to connect to my Windows SMB server!
o That means the plugin is an SMB client!

Is that plugin only an SMB client? 
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghisler.tcplugins.LAN>
 <https://www.ghisler.com/androidplugins/download/>
 <http://totalcommander.ch/aplg/tcandroidlan306.apk>

Maybe there is "magic" in an Android SMB client, but what I was asking
about was an SMB server that will work non-root with the native Windows SMB
client.

The "problem" (as Frank Slootweg knows better than I do), with SMB servers
on Android is that (modern) Windows SMB is hard coded to TCP port 445 at
the same time that Android non-root is hard coded to not allow an app to
use any port lower than 1024.

The only solution I've ever found on the net didn't work for me because the
Android freeware SMB server the guy used doesn't seem to exist anymore.
 Android: How to share folder over WiFi and access them from a Windows computer without rooting Android (using a Samba/SMB/CIFS server, a virtual computer, and some port-mapping) 
  <https://techforpassion.blogspot.com/2013/12/android-how-to-share-folder-over-wifi.html>

The Android non-root SMB server app he used was this (no longer exists):
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.funkyfresh.samba>

I assume his solution worked (because he seemed credible); so if we can
just find a free non-root SMB server app for Android, we might have the
general solution for everyone - but it requires messing with ports on
Windows so it's not the simple solution we would expect out of SMB:
 <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11525703/port-forwarding-in-windows>

What's ironic is that to mount Android on Windows, SMB is the _worst_
method - and yet - you'd think SMB would be the _best_ method. Sigh.

*In summary, we have two fantastic methods that work for everyone:*
o Android WebDAV shares connected to native Windows over WiFi
o Android ftp shares connected to freeware on Windows over WiFi

*In summary, we do not yet have a general solution that works for all of:*
o Android SMB shares connected to native Windows over WiFi
o Android MTP filesystems over USB (we have crippleware that does this)

As a related, perhaps minor, aside, I just found out an hour ago that the
FTPUse "Dokan" file system freeware on Windows (akin to FUSE on Linux)
seems to be incompatible with the MPTDrive "Dokan" file system on Windows:
  How do you figure out what programs are using the "Dokan Library" freeware? 
 <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/IEOpBrnegcs>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57036

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
news:pqnoh2.dik.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net Tue, 23 Oct 2018
16:16:07 GMT in comp.mobile.android, wrote: 

>   The main problem is his MO when interacting with people who he
> 'disagrees' with for some strange 'reason's. He tries to justify
> that MO, but before you know it, he again draws first blood and
> things go down hill with lightning speed.

Indeed. He quoted something I wrote, verbatim, crediting it's useful 
technical value; but not mentioning the person who wrote it (me). Very 
adult and mature, wouldn't you say? I'm not sure how he can justify 
calling me a moron, stupid, etc, when he lifts something I wrote, 
verbatim and credits it for the technical value. Does he not realize 
he's contradicting himself by doing that?


-- 
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here:
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
===================================================
Computer Lie #1: You'll never use all that disk space.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56783

On 22 Oct 2018 17:21:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   Well, as 'Arlen' posted, 'net use' *does* work with a WebDAV server
> and - in this context - WebDAV does offer similar functionality as FTP.
> 
>   So for WebDAV, 'net use' *is* "a way to access a drive" and hence
> *is* "something to support internet protocols".
> 
>   The whole point is that 'net use' *does* offer WebDAV compatibility/
> functionality, but for some reason does *not* offer FTP compatibility/
> functionality. That might make sense to Microsoft, but it doesn't make
> any sense to normal people, especially since FTP is older than WebDAV.

Hi Frank Slootweg,
I just read this, and, I have to say, THANK YOU FOR EXISTING!
You're the _only_ one who _comprehends_ the problem set.

FTP    (X:) drive: <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4233679dir018.jpg>
WebDAV (X:) drive: <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8624465dir019.jpg>

Sure, it's complex: But nobody but you and me seem to comprehend it.
Thank you for that summary above (which is better than I could write!).

I've concluded my tests, for the most part, where I _agree_ that "net use"
works _differently_ for WebDav than for FTP. It just does. Why? Hell if I
know. But it clearly does work differently.

What I wish I understood better is why Windows treats them differently,
and, more importantly, why I can almost perfectly treat the WebDav share as
an X: drive, even though it doesn't literally show up as a "removable
drive" as shown in this screenshot I posted a few days ago when I started
this quest. 
o "net use" <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8605173dir05.jpg>

Notice, by way of contrast, that FTP shares do show up as literally a
"removable drive".
o DirectNetDrive <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6340420dir012.jpg>
o NetDrive v1.3.2.0 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1383190dir014.jpg

That the WebDav "X:" is "slightly" different than the FTP "X:" drive is
what confuses me because I don't understand why Windows is "almost"
treating both as a "removable drive", but not completely doing so for the
WebDav as much as it's treating FTP shares as a bona-fide removable drive.
o FTP shares as a "removable drive" works perfectly!
  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=7002518dir020.jpg>
o WebDAV shares as a "removable drive" almost works perfectly
  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8624465dir019.jpg>

Not knowing what is different in Windows - which makes FTP "drive letter
X:" show up in the "removable drive" section, but the "WebDAV drive letter
X:" shows up in the network location section - and yet - I can run DOS
commands on both (but slightly differently).

Does anyone know why the X: drive letter is treated differently by Windows
for FTP shares (perfectly) versus for WebDAV shares (slightly less
perfectly)?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56798

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> wrote:
[...]

> What I wish I understood better is why Windows treats them differently,
> and, more importantly, why I can almost perfectly treat the WebDav share as
> an X: drive, even though it doesn't literally show up as a "removable
> drive" as shown in this screenshot I posted a few days ago when I started
> this quest. 
> o "net use" <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8605173dir05.jpg>

  When you use 'net use' (or 'Map network drive' in File Explorer), you
are creating a Network Drive, not a plain 'Drive'.

  Note that in your screenshot, all your 'Drive's are together in the
'Devices and drives' section of FE. Apparently Windows 10 FE has
'Drive', 'Removable Disk' and 'Local Disk' in this section. (8.1 just
has names and icons.) Anyway, the point is that in this section, all
things are *non*-'Network Drive's.

  As said, the drive 'X:' you created via the 'net use' command is a
*Network* Drive and hence appears in the 'Network locations' section of
FE.

  So there is a difference between a 'Removable Disk' (K: in your
screenshot) and a Network Drive (X: in your screenshot).

  For a 'Removable Disk', you can do an 'Eject'.

  For a Network Drive, you can do a 'Disconnect' or 'net use /delete'.

> Notice, by way of contrast, that FTP shares do show up as literally a
> "removable drive".
> o DirectNetDrive <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6340420dir012.jpg>
> o NetDrive v1.3.2.0 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1383190dir014.jpg

  Indeed. While these drives are *associated* with a network, they are
*not* Network Drives (i.e. do not appear in the 'Network locations'
section of FE), but are 'normal' drives, just as any drive in the
'Devices and drives' section of FE. So these drives are the same type as
your C: drive.

 I hope this has unconfused things a bit! :-)

[..]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56809

On 23 Oct 2018 15:58:30 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   When you use 'net use' (or 'Map network drive' in File Explorer), you
> are creating a Network Drive, not a plain 'Drive'.

Hi Frank Slootweg,
I appreciate that you're the _only_ person on this newsgroup who shows that
he comprehends not only the underlying Windows action, but also the desired
goal, and the tested solutions.

I only fully comprehend the desired goal, where I comprehend the tested
solutions less, and even less do I comprehend the underlying Windows
technology.

It must be true, as you say, that a "network drive" is not quite the same
thing, as a "drive", where, in the case of FTP "network drives", it's
different even more so, than it is in the case of WebDav "network drives".

>   Note that in your screenshot, all your 'Drive's are together in the
> 'Devices and drives' section of FE. Apparently Windows 10 FE has
> 'Drive', 'Removable Disk' and 'Local Disk' in this section. (8.1 just
> has names and icons.) Anyway, the point is that in this section, all
> things are *non*-'Network Drive's.

Indeed.
o FTP shares show up in the top "removable" drive section, while
o WebDAV shares show up in the bottom "network" drive section.

Yet, in both, I can right click and "Open command window here", which gives
me a command prompt on the "X:" file system, which then allows me to run
DOS commands *directly* on the mounted filesystem.

But they act slightly differently to a "X:" command undertaken from the C:
location inside a command prompt window.

>   As said, the drive 'X:' you created via the 'net use' command is a
> *Network* Drive and hence appears in the 'Network locations' section of
> FE.
>   So there is a difference between a 'Removable Disk' (K: in your
> screenshot) and a Network Drive (X: in your screenshot).

The difference exists, that's for sure.
Luckily, both allow "Open command prompt here" to work.

But, as noted, they work differently with respect to the command prompt:
o You can do more with FTP shares, than you can with WebDAV shares
> 
>   For a 'Removable Disk', you can do an 'Eject'.
>   For a Network Drive, you can do a 'Disconnect' or 'net use /delete'.

Yes. I noticed that the dismounts were different between them.
o We eject FTP drives
o We disconnect WebDAV drives

I'm not sure what power that provides, but I did notice the delta.

> 
>> Notice, by way of contrast, that FTP shares do show up as literally a
>> "removable drive".
>> o DirectNetDrive <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6340420dir012.jpg>
>> o NetDrive v1.3.2.0 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1383190dir014.jpg
> 
>   Indeed. While these drives are *associated* with a network, they are
> *not* Network Drives (i.e. do not appear in the 'Network locations'
> section of FE), but are 'normal' drives, just as any drive in the
> 'Devices and drives' section of FE. So these drives are the same type as
> your C: drive.
> 
>  I hope this has unconfused things a bit! :-)

Thanks, Frank Slootweg, for taking the energy to explain the networking
part of things.

As I noted, I'm very good with the problem set, and I'm fantastic at
empirically arriving at a solution for almost any difficult problem set
(since I use the same tactics as ants use to find food).

What I'm terrible at, is the underlying expertise in Windows.

I just don't have it - and I don't spend my time obtaining it since I spend
my time solving problems that nobody else seems to have solved before.

To that end, I will continue to strive to solve these remaining issues:
1. *There is no working non-root solution for SMB mounting over WiFi*
2. *There is no known freeware solution for MTP mounting over USB*

I have confidence that I will eventually solve both those problems (as I
almost never fail), but it won't be easy; and it will likely take a few
golden nuggets of knowledge from the intelligent adults on this newsgroup,
like you, in order to do so.

Thanks.

-- 
Funnel. Mirror. 
Strategy. Tactics. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56810

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 19:46:57 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:

> It must be true, as you say, that a "network drive" is not quite the same
> thing, as a "drive", where, in the case of FTP "network drives", it's
> different even more so, than it is in the case of WebDav "network drives".

Typo/thinko... 

The FTP is a "removable drive" while the WebDAV is a "network drive". 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56787

On 22 Oct 2018 17:21:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> [1] AFAIR, he was actually the first to mention FTPUSE in these groups.
>> From: Jonas Schneider <Jonas123Schneider@arcor.de>
>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.mobile.android
>> Subject: Re: What do you use to copy text files from Windows XP to Android over WiFi?
>> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 05:41:45 +0000 (UTC)
>> Message-ID: <ob2bio$9m4$1@news.albasani.net>

Frank is astute.

This is a post I wrote on how to use FTPuse with Windows XP long ago.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/OkDfuDN9fZU/GEHkDKzcAQAJ>

For decades, I've _always_ been improving our cross-platform capabilities.
(One productive success was with Windows/SunOS/Mac using CAP/Samba/SMB.)

This is the relatively recent article Frank referred folks to: 3/20/2017
 What do you use to copy text files from Windows XP to Android over WiFi? 
 <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/OkDfuDN9fZU%5B1-25%5D>

In those days, I was on WinXP & Android 4.3 - but it's amazing outside of
the fact that it's now Windows 10 and Android 7.0 that we've come a _huge_
way since then in terms of bilateral compatibility between Android &
Windows.

In fact, reading that thread was actually painful, since _every_ post turns
out to be dead wrong in many ways, if we compare what is said then to what
we'd say now (in terms of the huge improvement in cross-platform
capabilities).
=== begin a summary midway through the thread ===
With those criteria in mind, here are some of the solutions I tested: 
1. CIFS methods (eg Folder Tag with CIFS plugin & Network Browser) 
2. SMB methods (eg AndSMB & Astro & ES File Explorer & Total Commander) 
3. FTP methods (eg PrimitiveFTP & FTP Server & WinSCP & FileZilla) 
4. HTTP methods (eg Wifi Explorer & WiFi File Transfer) 
5. Sync methods (eg MyPhoneExplorer & AirDroid) 

RANKING OF ONLY THOSE SOLUTIONS THAT WORKED: 
3. FTP methods (best, by far, for native support in Windows File Explorer) 
4. HTTP methods (best for the clueless since it's so easy to use a browser) 
5. Sync methods (best for those who want to sync & control the phone) 

RANKINGS INCLUDING SOLUTIONS THAT SHOULD HAVE WORKED: 
1. CIFS methods (Should be best for Windows native File Explorer support) 
2. SMB methods (Should also work with Mac & Windows native file support) 
3. FTP methods (best, by far, for native support in Windows File Explorer) 
4. HTTP methods (best for the clueless since it's so easy to use a browser) 
5. Sync methods (best for those who want to sync & control the phone) 
=== end of that summary midway through the thread ===

Notice we wasted a _lot_ of time on SMB, which, obviously, if it would
work, would be fantastic - but it just won't work. Period.

And we wasted a lot of time on proprietary server:client solutions, all of
which were a total waste of effort. For example, a bunch of idiots said the
problem couldn't be solved without "paying for a solution", which is just
wrong in every way possible. (It's amazing when people are _that_ stupid.)

Basically only Frank & Paul added helpful technical insight to that thread.

Alas, Rudy Wieser (and nospam and about a score of other fools) just wasted
everyone's time, as usual, by (a) not ever comprehending the problem set,
and (b) by being literally dead wrong on everything they wrote.

Unfortunately, that Usenet thread, like this one, has 1 to 3 intelligent
respondents, and then about a dozen to a score of fools who just waste
everyone's time making technical progress difficult with their utter
childish drivel (read the thread to see what I mean).

The good news is that we have made _tremendous_ progress since then.

At this point, we have a bunch of very good solutions that work nearly
flawlessly, over USB & WiFI, with and without freeware additions.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web