Re: [Samba] SAMBA 3.0.3x and Sun Java One Directory Server 5.2 LDAP authentication
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Robert Mottishaw wrote: Is there a link or document that gives a good introduction to using Sun Java One Directory Server 5.2 for LDAP authentication with SAMBA on Solaris 10? We have the schema loaded and have a functioning LDAP server with POSIX attributes. How does one specify LDAP is the backend database to use for SAMBA authentication? What attributes are necessary and which are not necessary for SAMBA use? We're interested in this as well. Please be sure to post publicly. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] [ANNOUNCE] Samba 3.2.2 Available for Download
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Michael Adam wrote: Michael Adam wrote: Hi folks! Nicholas Brealey wrote: James Kosin wrote: -Original Message- From: Daniel Eischen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using -rpath/-R is the norm for Solaris packages. Samba already is built with knowledge of where it is installed and where its lib, data, var, etc directories reside. What is _not_ the norm, is having to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH in order for your applications to work. Take a look at all the packages at sunfreeware.com - they are all built for /usr/local and, at least from hundred or so packages I've installed from there, none require LD_LIBRARY_PATH to work when their libraries are in /usr/local/lib. I had the plan to provide the option of linking with an rpath as a configure option. But it is not so easy to get it right for all supported platforms (Nicholas only mentioned solaris and Linux...). And I did not have the time yet to complete this in an upstream compliant manner. Patches welcome!! To be more concrete: I suggest adding a configure option "--enable-rpath" that adds the appropriate LDFLAGS when appropriate for the build system (e.g. solaris and linux for a start) and gives notice when the system is unsupported (for rpath). Yes, it if is not on be default, then having a knob to enable it is the next best thing. See http://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commit;h=3a0f781352f364ce625a35ffd78257b27d984c47 and http://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=6850dc242b010bdcef5e427e51be04201f55b7f3 for what has already been in the sources and has been removed. By the way: It is not strictly necessary to modify the sources to create binaries linked with an rpath: By setting an appropriate "LDFLAGS" environment variable containing an RPATH option before calling configure, you can use an RPATH option for your install without modifying the sources, since the configure script picks up any externally set LDFLAGS and CFLAGS settings! ... :-) That is nice to know too. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] [ANNOUNCE] Samba 3.2.2 Available for Download
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008, James Kosin wrote: -Original Message- From: Daniel Eischen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 11:44 AM To: Brian H. Nelson Cc: James Kosin; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] [ANNOUNCE] Samba 3.2.2 Available for Download On Fri, 22 Aug 2008, Brian H. Nelson wrote: James Kosin wrote: Tim, You still may have to move the libraries to their normal spot or make an entry in /etc/ld.so.conf to point to the directory where the libraries are kept for samba. James On Solaris, one uses the crle command to achieve the same result. Aside from that, I believe that the general practice for packages that include their own libraries is to hard-code the libpath into any applicable binaries using '-rpath $prefix/lib' in the linking step (or '-R $prefix/lib' with Solaris ld). If you install samba into its own area (say /usr/local/samba) and the libraries are installed in a non-system location (perhaps /usr/local/samba/lib), messing with the runtime linker config to make samba work should NOT be required. Exactly! I had the same problem, I believe with 3.0.31. I think I solved it by editing the Makefile (after configuring samba) to add '-R $prefix/lib' as described above. On Solaris, the configure step _should_ generate a Makefile with the -R (or -rpath) option above, but it does not. -- DE Maybe, we should have an option. Packagers don't really want or need to modify their 'ld' settings with the '-R' option. Or really install in the same path as the destination system for packaging. Is the ld -R option only temporary; or does this add an entry in the ld.so.cache for future reference? Sorry, I'm a bit ignorant and have been out of touch. It only affects the binaries produced when using the option. Packages/binaries can be built by any user, -R doesn't require root privileges. The bigger issue may be having the libraries actually being installed in a shared area known by ld on the destination system, as oppose to HARD CODING or RE-CONFIGURING ld to accept a new location hmmm The '-rpath' option would cause issues if a third party developed tools that linked to libnetapi.so in the normal way of using '-lnetapi'... causing confusion when porting to another platform where the libraries may/could be located elsewhere. The -R option looks harmless enough; but, packagers (RPM, etc) might take notice of ld not operating correctly after building a package for release. Using -rpath/-R is the norm for Solaris packages. Samba already is built with knowledge of where it is installed and where its lib, data, var, etc directories reside. What is _not_ the norm, is having to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH in order for your applications to work. Take a look at all the packages at sunfreeware.com - they are all built for /usr/local and, at least from hundred or so packages I've installed from there, none require LD_LIBRARY_PATH to work when their libraries are in /usr/local/lib. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] [ANNOUNCE] Samba 3.2.2 Available for Download
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008, Christoph Kaegi wrote: On 21.08-21:42, Tim Evans wrote: Karolin Seeger wrote: o Fix creation and installation of shared libraries. On Solaris 10 (Solaris 10 5/08 s10s_u5wos_10 SPARC), the build completes, but starting the daemons results in: # /etc/init.d/samba start ld.so.1: smbd: fatal: libtalloc.so.1: open failed: No such file or directory Killed ld.so.1: nmbd: fatal: libtalloc.so.1: open failed: No such file or directory Killed Configure command was: CC=cc ./configure --with-acl-support --with-included-popt --with-ldap=no --with-ads=no Previously, the make failed with reference to the same shared libs, as was reported by others on this list. Add something like export LDFLAGS="-L/usr/lib/samba -R/usr/lib/samba" to your environment, with paths pointing to where the samba libs are going to be installed. This is a band-aid. The binaries should be rebuilt with the linker's -R or -rpath option. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] [ANNOUNCE] Samba 3.2.2 Available for Download
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008, Brian H. Nelson wrote: James Kosin wrote: Tim, You still may have to move the libraries to their normal spot or make an entry in /etc/ld.so.conf to point to the directory where the libraries are kept for samba. James On Solaris, one uses the crle command to achieve the same result. Aside from that, I believe that the general practice for packages that include their own libraries is to hard-code the libpath into any applicable binaries using '-rpath $prefix/lib' in the linking step (or '-R $prefix/lib' with Solaris ld). If you install samba into its own area (say /usr/local/samba) and the libraries are installed in a non-system location (perhaps /usr/local/samba/lib), messing with the runtime linker config to make samba work should NOT be required. Exactly! I had the same problem, I believe with 3.0.31. I think I solved it by editing the Makefile (after configuring samba) to add '-R $prefix/lib' as described above. On Solaris, the configure step _should_ generate a Makefile with the -R (or -rpath) option above, but it does not. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] LF vs CRLF (Was: Mapping a network drive to a Windows Drive Letter)
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Wolfgang Ratzka wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: We have this working. however Some developers edit files using "windows editors" and when they then copy them to the Windows Drive Letter which is mapped to a Unix machine, the resultant file is full of ^M characters. build breaks. and so on Until now we have been telling users to run "dos2unix" beforehand, but somebody told me that "Samba" can handle this if properly configured ? Is this possible ?If so can somebody please help me ? This cannot be done. Samba would need to decide for every file whether it is DOS text, that needs to be recoded, or a binary file, which must not be touched. Do you use a source code management tool like CVS for your files? We use CVS and have configured it to check for DOS files (and other things) upon commit. In our case we've set it up to disallow the commit and force the developer to fix the problem(s). If you are using an SCM tool, perhaps you could get it to do something similar or even automatically do the conversion for you. -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Re: Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Dragan Krnic wrote: > > The way it works now in the sources, Samba goes out of its way > to force Windows clients to see the file times the way Unix and > other more mature systems see them. If a file was modified at > noon 12:00:00 of any day, it shows 12:00:00 always, regardless > of the date on which it was modified or the date on which one > is beholding it. Samba does it by subtracting from the real GMT > in the timestamps the difference between "TimeDiff(timestamp)" > and "get_serverzone()", which means that it fakes the timestamp > GMT in such a way that Windows still see the right time and not > the wrong Windows time, which is actually what everybody wants > to see, so that pacemakers don't stop and rod injectors don't melt. If anyone is relying on date & timestamps under Windows (or even using any general-purpose OS!) for such safety-critical things as pacemakers and nuclear reactors, then we have a much bigger problem ;-) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] None
On Thu, 8 May 2003, John H Terpstra wrote: > On Thu, 8 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 02:22:00AM +, John H Terpstra wrote: > > > On Tue, 6 May 2003, Joseph Leipert wrote: > > > > > > > I have Question, I have a school running on samba. I want none of the > > > > users to have the right to delete files, but they must be able to write > > > > to the files. How do I do that? > > > > > > You sure do have a question here! > > > > > > Under Unix/Linux the right to write to a file means the right and ability > > > to delete the file. If you can get that changed, then we can accommodate > > > your request. Until then, we live and die by the operating system we live > > > on top of. > > > > Errr, actually no - UNIX *can* do this. The ability to delete a file is > > held in the *directory* the file is contained in, not the file itself. > > Doh! So true! Thanks Jeremy. I'm interpreting the question a bit, but I would think the original poster would want the ability to create _new_ files. Wouldn't this disallow creation of new files? -- DE -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
