Re: Samba DC provisioning fails with Posix ACL enabled FFS
Thanks :-) Am 29.11.21 um 21:03 schrieb Jaromír Doleček: UFS_ACL enabled in XEN3_DOMU now. Le lun. 29 nov. 2021 à 17:46, Matthias Petermann a écrit : Am 28.11.21 um 17:32 schrieb Christos Zoulas: Thanks for the bug report :-) christos You're welcome :-) One more small question: currently the UFS_ACL option in the XEN3_DOMU is not enabled by default for the amd64 architecture. For XEN_DOM0 the option is enabled. I guess that the main use case for the ACLs for many users will be Samba. If one installs Samba on a Xen system, it will probably be in a DOMU rather than a DOM0. What do you think about enabling this UFS_ACL for XEN3_DOMU as well? Kind regards Matthias
Re: Samba DC provisioning fails with Posix ACL enabled FFS
UFS_ACL enabled in XEN3_DOMU now. Le lun. 29 nov. 2021 à 17:46, Matthias Petermann a écrit : > > Am 28.11.21 um 17:32 schrieb Christos Zoulas: > > Thanks for the bug report :-) > > > > christos > > > > You're welcome :-) > > One more small question: currently the UFS_ACL option in the XEN3_DOMU > is not enabled by default for the amd64 architecture. For XEN_DOM0 the > option is enabled. I guess that the main use case for the ACLs for many > users will be Samba. If one installs Samba on a Xen system, it will > probably be in a DOMU rather than a DOM0. > > What do you think about enabling this UFS_ACL for XEN3_DOMU as well? > > Kind regards > Matthias
Re: Samba DC provisioning fails with Posix ACL enabled FFS
Am 28.11.21 um 17:32 schrieb Christos Zoulas: Thanks for the bug report :-) christos You're welcome :-) One more small question: currently the UFS_ACL option in the XEN3_DOMU is not enabled by default for the amd64 architecture. For XEN_DOM0 the option is enabled. I guess that the main use case for the ACLs for many users will be Samba. If one installs Samba on a Xen system, it will probably be in a DOMU rather than a DOM0. What do you think about enabling this UFS_ACL for XEN3_DOMU as well? Kind regards Matthias
Re: Samba DC provisioning fails with Posix ACL enabled FFS
Hello all, it turned out that my problem was a result of an inconsistency in the ACL variant (NFSv4 vs. POSIX1e) that existed in NetBSD-current for about 2 months. Christos was kind enough to look at it and fix it right away[1]. My big thanks for that! With all NetBSD-current builds with sources from 2021-11-27 and newer the provisioning of an AD domain can be expected to works now. I tested this with success with Samba from pkgsrc-2021Q3. Many greetings Matthias [1] https://anonhg.netbsd.org/src/rev/21d465dbb2a8
Re: Samba DC provisioning fails with Posix ACL enabled FFS
On 25.11.21 14:49, Matthias Petermann wrote: I am using Samba 4.13.11 from pkgsrc-2021Q3 (compiled with acl-Option). The NetBSD version is: NetBSD net.local 9.99.92 NetBSD 9.99.92 (XEN3_DOMU_CUSTOM) #0: Thu Nov 25 06:26:36 CET 2021 mpeterma@sysbldr92.local:/home/mpeterma/netbsd-current/obj/sys/arch/amd64/compile/XEN3_DOMU_CUSTOM amd64 Just to add another data point: I just found out that I have a VM with NetBSD 9.99.88 build from 2021-11-03 with Samba 4.13.10 for which the provisioning works. So it looks like there is only a small time window I have to investigate for possible changes. In case someone expected the same issue and knows what the problem is - I will be thankful for any hint. In case I find the issue by myself, I will send an update as soon as possible. Kind regards Matthias
