Re: New sam system

2002-08-19 Thread Kai Krueger
From: Kai Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:21 PM So now back to the structure of the handles. As mentioned before, I don't think it has actually been decided upon (but perhaps I'm just not aware of it). All opinions with reasons are therefore very welcome.

Re: New sam system

2002-08-10 Thread Kai Krueger
- Original Message - From: Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:09 AM Kai Krueger wrote: P.S. perhaps adding const all along would make it clear which parameters are in parameters and which are out paramters Yes, that would be a very good idea.

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: [NON-Text Body part not included] These messages that only consist of a PGP encoded piece are getting damn annoying. Regards - Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: [ Ok, I've switched off gpg signing for all samba lists... ] Hi! I'm working on the new sam system currently and was wondering whether the following patch should be applied to source/sam/SAM-Interface-handles.txt: Well, I would say you

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Jelmer Vernooij
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:54:06AM +0930, Richard Sharpe wrote about 'Re: New sam system': On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: [ Ok, I've switched off gpg signing for all samba lists... ] Weird that mutt generates encrypted files when I tell it to only sign it... :-( I'm working

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
In a hurry... At 17:53 31.07.2002 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: [ Ok, I've switched off gpg signing for all samba lists... ] Hi! I'm working on the new sam system currently and was wondering whether the following patch should be applied to source/sam/SAM-Interface-handles.txt: -NTSTATUS

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Jelmer Vernooij
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 08:12:04PM +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote about 'Re: New sam system': -NTSTATUS sam_get_user_by_sid(NT_USER_TOKEN *access, uint32 access_desired, DOM_SID *usersid, SAM_USER_HANDLE **user) -NTSTATUS sam_get_user_by_name(NT_USER_TOKEN *access, uint32

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 19:13, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 02:54:06AM +0930, Richard Sharpe wrote about 'Re: New sam system': On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: [ Ok, I've switched off gpg signing for all samba lists... ] Weird that mutt generates encrypted files

RE: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Esh, Andrew
Title: RE: New sam system They are not encrypted, they are simply signed. The problem is, it attaches them to the email as a separate attachment. Some email readers don't automatically display certain attachments, so the main body of the message is all that is displayed. Since there isn't one

Re: New sam system

2002-07-31 Thread Andrew Bartlett
Kai Krueger wrote: P.S. perhaps adding const all along would make it clear which parameters are in parameters and which are out paramters Yes, that would be a very good idea. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication