[Samba] [3.0.28a] Telling XP to save password?
On 2008-06-27, Charles Marcus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On 2008-06-27, Gilles ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >> Is there a way to tell XP to remember the password between >> reboots/sessions? > > Why on gods green earth would you want to do that? > > I know you can configure XP to auto-login with a certain > username/password, but I've never even considered > attempting that on a domain member so don't > know if it will work in that context... And on the same day a little later Willy Offermans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 2008-06-27, Gilles ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >> We're successfully running Samba 3.0.28a on a FreeBSD >> server and sharing files with XP clients. There's only one >> problem: By default, XP doesn't let the user save the password, >> so they have to type it every time they reboot. >> >> Is there a way to tell XP to remember the password between >> reboots/sessions? > In general, saving a password isn't a good idea. It is annoying > to remember a password by heart and to retype it again and again, > but it is the best option. So probably there is a way to > ``tell XP to remember the password between reboots/sessions``, > but that is most probably not what you want. I advice you to > re-consider the issue to find a proper solution. Yes, sure, it's a very bad idea, but a lot of industry fat-cats (if you can call banks and insurers industry, however industrious they are about your money) are willing to pay obscene amounts of fees to identity provision specialists to make single-sign-on possible for their employees, because if they have to keep 'em all in their heads they usually tend to regress to very mnemonic easy-to-crack passwords. I'm all for security but one needs to keep things in perspective. If I've logged myself in to a Samba NT-Type domain controller with a very complicated combination of capitals and lowercases, numerals and special characters, I don't see why the same password and account name pair should not be useable to also connect to a corporate print server, even if it is under the sovereignty of an AD-type controller which doesn't trust my server by default because it's not Microsoft. Gilles' complaint is actually very easy to amend in principle: Start -> Settings -> Control Panel -> User Accounts And then to the tab "Manage Passwords". You can set a default user/password pair for "*.yourCompany.COM" and as many differing pairs as needed for those special resources with restricted rights like "taxes.courCompany.COM" and when you login again all those resources are at your fingertip automagically. The problem is that if you use roaming profiles in a Samba domain and you rolled out your clients by means of cloning a master client or some other complication like changing the domain SID midstream it won't work again and I'll be damned if I know why. Can someone be more constructive and less proselytic? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba Digest, Vol 64, Issue 25
> from windows i am trying to access like this > Go to Start menu -> run and type \\192.168.248.195, > now it will show the list of the samba folders > but when i double click on the folder it prompts > for username and passwd and when i enter > the samba username and passwd it will popup > "Cannot be accessed u might now have permissions to access this" There are usually some registry changes required for an XP to connect to a Samba server. I use this: Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Netlogon\Parameters requiresignorseal = REG_DWORD 0x signsecurechannel = REG_DWORD 0x -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 3/11/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:53:19PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: > > I will, but is it really a bug? > > Or was it designed to hurt Samba? > > Naaa, a handle leak is definitely a bug. I never believed > that Microsoft puts in stuff to annoy Samba. The worst I > could believe is that they choose some nasty timing for > announcements, but I don't think they ever put stuff in to > explicitly break Samba. This does not say that they > deliberatly neglect Samba in their testing and that they > might have been happy in the past about the fallout when > they break us by accident, but directly nasty -- no. By the way, a colleague of mine who was bothered by this problem (MFC Cfile objects leaking parent dir handles) found out that this problem only started with "MFC42.dll" in Version 6.6, which is installed in both "System32" and in "SysWoW64" subdirs of an XP/x64. He tried to replace it with the version 6.2, which is usually part of XP/ia32, but every time he deletes it or overwrites it, when he reboots the version 6.6 is again there. In short - by putting the "MFC42.dll" version 6.2 in the same directory with the executable, e.g. "Tester.exe", the problem can also be solved but your patch is a much cleaner solution, especially knowing that it is part of the new Samba 3.0.28a. Thank you very much. Regards Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 3/10/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:33:17PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: >> On 3/10/08, Dragan Krnic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On 3/7/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: >>>> >>>>> Volker, can you please look at it and see if you can suggest a fix? >>>> >>>> Can you try the attached patch? This fixes it for me. >>> >>> Thank you, Volker. >>> I'll try it out (takes some time to get all the bits and compile). >> >> It didn't take so much time and it works. > > Now you should report the bug to MS :-) > > You will very likely see the same behaviour when you run > against OS/2 or Win95 as a server :-) I will, but is it really a bug? Or was it designed to hurt Samba? A little bit off topic, but I had another problem with XP/x64 in connection with Oracle. For quite some time Oracle was effectively disabled under XP/x64 due to the fact that the 32-bit paths to executables and libraries contained brackets in the string. Even today there is no direct way to configure an Oracle server as a Data Source. Might be an innocent lack of due dilligence but when it hurts the competition so bad, one wonders. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 3/10/08, Dragan Krnic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/7/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: >> >>> Volker, can you please look at it and see if you can suggest a fix? >> >> Can you try the attached patch? This fixes it for me. > > Thank you, Volker. > I'll try it out (takes some time to get all the bits and compile). It didn't take so much time and it works. Thank you, Volker. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 3/7/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: > >> Volker, can you please look at it and see if you can suggest a fix? > > Can you try the attached patch? This fixes it for me. Thank you, Volker. I'll try it out (takes some time to get all the bits and compile). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 2/4/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 07:07:36PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote: > > Does anyone know how to avoid this problem? > > Should I provide some more diagnostics? > > Your smb.conf, debug level 10 logs and sniffs of all > combinations please! > > Volker my effective smb.conf: 1 2 [global] 3 workgroup = PMN1 4 netbios name = PMN93 5 server string = "" 6 wins server = 172.24.204.184 7 preferred master = no 8 local master = no 9 domain master = no 10 server signing = no 11 encrypt passwords = yes 12 security = domain 13 time server = no 14 passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u 15 username level = 3 16 unix password sync = yes 17 lanman auth = no 18 dos filemode = yes 19 log level = 1 20 debug timestamp = yes 21 log file = /var/log/samba/%m 22 max log size = 65536 23 socket options = SO_KEEPALIVE IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY 24 max xmit = 65535 25 unix charset = UTF8 26 display charset = UTF8 27 os level = 31 28 lock dir = /var/lock/samba/locks 29 pid directory = /var/lock/samba 30 create mask = 0664 31 directory mask = 0775 32 hide dot files = no 33 map system = no 34 map hidden = no 35 map archive = no 36 store dos attributes = yes 37 map acl inherit = yes 38 host msdfs = no 39 printing = cups 40 printcap name = cups 41 42 [homes] 43 comment = Home Directories 44 valid users = %U 45 read only = no 46 inherit permissions = yes 47 security mask = 0777 48 directory security mask = 0777 49 browseable = no 50 store dos attributes = yes 51 52 [PRIMA] 53 comment = "for Project work" 54 directory security mask = 0777 55 dos filetimes = yes 56 inherit permissions = yes 57 map system = no 58 oplocks = no 59 path = /local/PRIMA 60 read only = no 61 security mask = 0777 62 hide unreadable = yes 63 map hidden = no 64 map archive = no 65 store dos attributes = yes 66 map acl inherit = yes 67 use sendfile = yes 68 strict sync = yes I have enclosed 4 files compressed with bzip2 documenting the problem when an x64 client opens a file in a Samba share: 1. messages.x64.fmt.bz2 formatted full_audit log 2. pmn33.x64.bz2 formatted level 10 samba log 3. wireshark.out.bz2 formatted wireShark print-out 4. x64-26-07.bz2 capture file with relevant 200 packets All files include data captured at 16:26:07 today. The transaction opening the file for read, setting kernel_flock and returning xattr should start at about packet 69 in capture file. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
On 2/5/08, Volker Lendecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:25:03PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote:
> > 1. messages.x64.fmt.bz2 formatted full_audit log
> > 2. pmn33.x64.bz2 formatted level 10 samba log
> > 3. wireshark.out.bz2 formatted wireShark print-out
> > 4. x64-26-07.bz2 capture file with relevant 200 packets
>
> This is not usable, sorry. Remove the formatting and send
> sniffs *COMPARING* both behaviours.
Sorry, Volker, I didn't manage to get both behaviours in one session
but here we go for the behaviour of a Windows XP/ia32:
The sequence of
opening the file for read,
getting the oplock (kernel_flock)
getxattr
in lines 274 through 276 of the formatted full_audit log in the said file
# 1 messages.x86.fmt.bz2 flips directly to "fstat". But in the new file
# 1 messages.ia32.fmt.bz2 you can see that there is a whole lot more
being done on a 32-bit Windows XP, before it eventually continues
with "fstat" etc. The transactions in lines 278 ("stat") through 298
("get_nt_acl")
are missing in the full_audit log when the client is a Windows XP/x64
and this practically means that the handle on the parent's directory
never gets released by the client.
Since all of the transactions in these files are taking place at exactly the
same time today at 20:38:19, just as all the transactions occurred exactly
same time yesterday at 16:26:07, I've removed the timestamp, host name,
service name, user name and client's IP-address to make the file more
compact and easier to read. The format gives 20 characters (the length
of "sys_acl_get_tag_type") to the action, 6 char for sucess (empty) or
failure (NoDATA or NoFILE) and the rest of the line is the path name
relative to the share's root, followed eventually by a stream name (e.g.
user.DOSATTRIB) .
I've abstained from formatting the samba log at level 10 in the new file:
#2 pmn30.ia32.bz2. I'm sorry, that the previous file was formatted in a
way that _I_ find easiest to follow - by coalescing all the lines between two
timestamps into one line. I'm a bit attention-challenged and can't see
the wood when there are too many trees around:-), so I thought everyone
will like the way I look at it. Anyway the new file contains 12322 lines
just as they are spewed out by Samba. I can't see where the kernel_flock
is logged in Samba level 10 - I guess around line #11675 or so but you'll
find it I'm sure.
The 3rd file in this letter is the raw capture file "ia32-20-38-19.bz2" with
186 relevant packets at that point in time. The problem transaction begins
at packet #69. I haven't enclosed the wireShark print-out of all expanded
packets at all, which you can produce yourself if you need it.
I hope you'll see what's wrong when an x64 XP client is communicating
with a Samba server as opposed to when a 32-bit XP client is doing it,
and doing it right.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] WinXP/x64 - MFC CFile objects leak parent directory handles
Samba 3.0.28-0.1.95-1624-SUSE-SL10.3
A strange problem (best read in a proportional font).
It only happens on an x64 XP client when accessing
a Samba share. The exact same program runs fine
on the same x64 XP client when the share accessed
is on a Windows server or when it is run on a 32-bit
XP client, regardless of whether the share belongs to
a Samba server or to a Windows server.
I have traced the problem to a local instantiation of an
object of MFC class CFile in the line 170 of the following
code:
166 CString CWaitForChangedFile::GetFileContent()
167 { if (mstrFilePath.IsEmpty())
168 return "";
169 _my_TRY
170 CFile file(mstrFilePath,
CFile::modeRead |
CFile::shareDenyNone);
171 int size = (int)file.GetLength();
172 CString text;
173 file.Close();
174 text.Format("%d", size);
175 return text;
176 _my_REPORT_EXCEPTION_ALL
177 return "ERROR!";
178 }
When the programm using this method is run on a
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition and a file
"mstrFilePath" is opened for read with an oplock
of type "DenyNone" on a Samba share, as above
in line 170, a new handle to the parent directory
remains stuck until the program is stopped, which
should actually be removed when the program exits
the method. The handle looks something like this
in the output of "handle.exe -a -p thisProg.exe":
46C: File (RWD) \Device\LanmanRedirector\;X:00014c30\samba\T01\
On the Linux side (SuSE 10.3, kernel 2.6.22.13-0.3-default)
I can trace this behaviour to the fact that the transactions in
the lines 39 through 60 in the following formatted audit log
don't appear when the programm is run on an x64 XP, which
DO get executed when the program is run on a 32-bit XP
(the lines following the "getxattr" of "user.DOSATTRIB"
after setting the "kernel_flock" on the already opened file).
1 stat T01/T01.ini
2 getxattr T01/T01.ini:user.DOSATTRIB
3 THE PREVIOUS 2 LINES REPEATED 14 TIMES
4 stat .
5 stat T01
6 getxattr No data T01|user.DOSATTRIB
7 stat T01/T01.ini
8 opendir T01
9 stat T01/T01.ini
10 stat T01/T01.ini
11 sys_acl_get_file T01/T01.ini
12 getxattr No data T01/T01.ini:user.SAMBA_PAI
13sys_acl_get_entry
14 sys_acl_get_tag_type
15 sys_acl_get_permset
16 sys_acl_get_perm
17 sys_acl_get_perm
18sys_acl_get_entry
19 sys_acl_get_tag_type
20 sys_acl_get_permset
21 sys_acl_get_perm
22 sys_acl_get_perm
23sys_acl_get_entry
24 sys_acl_get_tag_type
25 sys_acl_get_permset
26 sys_acl_get_perm
27 sys_acl_get_perm
28sys_acl_get_entry
29 sys_acl_free_acl
30 fget_nt_acl T01/T01.ini
31 getxattr T01/T01.ini:user.DOSATTRIB
32 closedir
33 stat T01/T01.ini
34 stat T01
35 getxattr T01/T01.ini:user.DOSATTRIB
36 open r T01/T01.ini
37 kernel_flock T01/T01.ini
38 getxattr T01/T01.ini:user.DOSATTRIB
39 *** stat T01/T01.ini
40 sys_acl_get_file T01/T01.ini
41 getxattr No data T01/T01.ini:user.SAMBA_PAI
42sys_acl_get_entry
43 sys_acl_get_tag_type
44 sys_acl_get_permset
45 sys_acl_get_perm
46 sys_acl_get_perm
47sys_acl_get_entry
48 sys_acl_get_tag_type
49 sys_acl_get_permset
50 sys_acl_get_perm
51 sys_acl_get_perm
52sys_acl_get_entry
53 sys_acl_get_tag_type
54 sys_acl_get_permset
55 sys_acl_get_perm
56 sys_acl_get_perm
57sys_acl_get_entry
58 sys_acl_free_acl
59 get_nt_acl T01/T01.ini
60 ** fstat T01/T01.ini
61 getxattr T01/T01.ini:user.DOSATTRIB
62fstat T01/T01.ini
63 sendfile T01/T01.ini
I guess that Samba sends the same information in response
to a "getxattr" no matter what the bitness of the client is.
So it's probably the client SMB code on x64 XP which is
doing something in a different way when it finds out that the
share belongs to a Samba server.
No combination of oplock settings makes any difference.
Does anyone know how to avoid this problem?
Should I provide some more diagnostics?
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Re: Standalone Server with Wins -- Password Not Required on Win/XP
On 1/18/08, Ryan Novosielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dragan Krnic wrote:
> |>> If I enter userid Only, I gain full access to the share without
> |>> Ever entering a password
> |> This incorrect behavior is caused as a result of
> |> "preferred master = yes" in the smb.conf file.
> |> If I comment this line out in smb.conf, everything
> |> works fine.
> |
> | What has "preferred master" to do with this passwords?
> | I'm really puzzled, especially because I set my PDC as
> | "preferred master", even though it would probably by
> | default ("auto") chose to be one.
>
> Virtually zero. All it does it make is slightly more likely that it will
> win a browsing election. If you read the smb.conf manpage, I think it is
> pretty clear, but it's been awhile since I read it.
>
> That COULD have an effect if it disables browsing to the proper password
> server, but it has no direct effect.
There might be something to it, if "preferred master" is masking the actual
authentification server. But still, was it really the case?
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Standalone Server with Wins -- Password Not Required on Win/XP
>> If I enter userid Only, I gain full access to the share without
>> Ever entering a password
>
> This incorrect behavior is caused as a result of
> "preferred master = yes" in the smb.conf file.
> If I comment this line out in smb.conf, everything
> works fine.
What has "preferred master" to do with this passwords?
I'm really puzzled, especially because I set my PDC as
"preferred master", even though it would probably by
default ("auto") chose to be one.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] open_fake_file access_denied file[$Extend/$Quota:$Q:$INDEX_ALLOCATION]
By very few users the Samba log files get clogged with access_denied messages at open_fake_file_shared every 15 minutes: smbd/fake_file.c:open_fake_file(114) open_fake_file_shared: access_denied to service[] file[$Extend/$Quota:$Q:$INDEX_ALLOCATION] user[] open_fake_file fails with this error if the "current_user.ut.uid" is not root, so either the user is trying to fetch information he is not entiteld to or smbd under some circumstances fails to gain appropriate privileges for this kind of access. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: SID
>>> Is it OK to set the local SID to the same value as >>> the domain SID, as the quoted posting seems to imply? >> >> http://us1.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/NetCommand.html#id365521 >> >> "... there is now a safe copy of the local machine SID. On a PDC/BDC >> this is the domain SID also." >> >> So, as the documentation says, yes, on a PDC/BDC the machine SID IS >> equal to the domain SID. > > The local SID is the machine SID. > > Let it be ultimately clear - only a PDC and BDC may have the samba SID. > On a PDC and BDC the Domain SID is the same as the machine SID. Thanks, Edmundo, Thanks, John, The difference between a BDC and a member server seems to be mainly that a BDC can jump in for a crashed PDC and a server member can't. That means a little more careful configuring but if that would stop it from barking unable to map SID: S-1-5-21-NOTORIOUS-DOMAIN-SID-myRID it would be worth the trouble. Are there performance reasons against promoting 4 member servers to BDCs to equalize the SIDs? Tu put it in different words: why would a joined member server still have problems identifying a regular domain-Joe? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: SID
> What I ended up doing was to use an LDAP browser > and edit the domain accounts for ech machine to > have the same SID. we're not using LDAP but we can manipulate the trivial data base file "secrets.tdb" to set the locl SID to any sensible SID. Is it OK to set the local SID to the same value as the domain SID? In our network the PDC server has the same local SID as the domain SID. All other member servers register the same domain SID for the domain and a totally different local SID for themselves in "secrets.tdb". This works quite well, except that sometimes there is an entry in samba logs that a domain-qualified user SID with correct RID for an existing user with the same UID=(RID-1000)/2 and same GIDs on all member servers can't be mapped to his name, e.g. [2007/08/21 20:48:26, 0] smbd/posix_acls.c:create_canon_ace_lists(1421) create_canon_ace_lists: unable to map SID S-1-5-21-3574958883-2392404172-2943802112-2590 to uid or gid. whereby RID=2590 translates to UID=795, a well-known user in our domain S-1-5-21-3574958883-2392404172-2943802112. Is it OK to set the local SID to the same value as the domain SID, as the quoted posting seems to imply? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba Digest, Vol 56, Issue 2
> What I ended up doing was to use an LDAP browser > and edit the domain accounts for ech machine to > have the same SID. we're not using LDAP but we can manipulate the trivial data base file "secrets.tdb" to set the locl SID to any sensible SID. Is it OK to set the local SID to the same value as the domain SID? In our network the PDC server has the same local SID as the domain SID. All other member servers register the same domain SID for the domain and a totally different local SID for themselves in "secrets.tdb". This works quite well, except that sometimes there is an entry in samba logs that a domain-qualified user SID with correct RID for an existing user with the same UID=(RID-1000)/2 and same GIDs on all member servers can't be mapped to his name, e.g. [2007/08/21 20:48:26, 0] smbd/posix_acls.c:create_canon_ace_lists(1421) create_canon_ace_lists: unable to map SID S-1-5-21-3574958883-2392404172-2943802112-2590 to uid or gid. whereby RID=2590 translates to UID=795, a well-known user in our domain S-1-5-21-3574958883-2392404172-2943802112. Is it OK to set the local SID to the same value as the domain SID, as the quoted posting seems to imply? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba Digest, Vol 55, Issue 18
What's wrong with WARLOCK? Just kidding. If you don't like it, change it, but do expect problems. It's not something you will find a recipee for in a How-to book. The SETLOCALSID changes only the LOCAL SID, not the GLOBAL SID, for which we would probably need SETGLOBALSID. When I faced the same problem, I did something really wrong but it worked. I copy-pasted the LOCAL SID to the GLOBAL SID in "secrets.tdb". Now in your case, it would probably be even easier to just think up a new 7-letter word to overwrite the current name in both "smb.conf" and "secrets.tdb". Unfortunately WARLOCK is also tatooed in several places in each client's registry. Hopefully, pasting over the new name with a .reg script will obviate the need to re-join the domain. Try it out, when there is no one to disturb. Back up "/etc/samba" and "/var/lock/samba" with smb and nmb stopped so that you can back out of it if necessary. From: Didster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: samba@lists.samba.org Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:31:52 +0100 Subject: [Samba] Changing domain name Hi, For reasons best known to the IT admin before myself, we currently have a domain name of WARLOCK. I want to change this. We have about 15 WinXP Pro client machines on the domain as well as a few linux domain clients. A bit of reading shows that it should be as simple as doing a net getlocalsid, making the change, followed by a net setlocalsid. I started doing this when I noticed something [The PDC machine name is North]: north:~# net getlocalsid SID for domain NORTH is: S-1-5-21-2864586203-3687421127-69847892 north:~# net getlocalsid WARLOCK SID for domain WARLOCK is: S-1-5-21-403220451-921850273-241492889 According to this in the how to: Chapter 13. Remote and Local Management: The Net Command "First, do not forget to store the local SID in a file. It is a good idea to put this in the directory in which the smb.conf file is also stored. Here is a simple action to achieve this: root# net getlocalsid > /etc/samba/my-sid Good, there is now a safe copy of the local machine SID. On a PDC/BDC this is the domain SID also." It says that on a PDC, it should give the domain SID. So, why on my PDC do I get different results for getlocalsid and getlocalsid ? I'm probably being stupid, but worried if I change the domain name, and do a "setlocalsid S-1-5-21-403220451-921850273-241492889" it will just change the SID of the machine, and I wont be able to restore the domain SID. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] 3.0.25b-1.1.72-1411 - copy from and to the same samba share
A copy from a samba share to the same share frequently fails with error "The specified network name is no longer available". The remaining copy is the same size as source but corrupted. WinXP logs an obscure NetBT Event ID 4322, which says "NetBT could not process a request, because at least one OutOfResources-Exception occurred in the last hour". One can reproduce this error anytime if one chooses a big enough file and copies it a second time before the first copy is done. Samba 3.0.24 does not have this bug. When a double copy fails there is this line in full_audit log at the moment the errors pop up: Jul 16 14:52:15 p92 smbd_audit: [2007/07/16 14:52:15, 0] lib/util_sock.c:read_data(534) Jul 16 14:52:15 p92 smbd_audit: read_data: read failure for 4 bytes to client 172.24.204.176. Error = Connection reset by peer Is this a known problem ? Can I produce more diagnostics to help fix it ? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Roaming profile - Folder redirection - Erase file on server
I'm in a testing environement with a Samba server setup as a PDC with some share (netlogon, profiles) to support roaming profile. My "smb.conf" file contain the good configuration parameters for "logon path" and "logon home" etc .. For my roaming profile, I setup a Folder redirection using the "HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\User Shell Folders" registery key. I modify the value of AppData, Cookies, Desktop, Favorites, My Pictures, Personal. Every folder are redirect to the network share with %LOGONSERVER% and %USERNAME% variable. There is no problem with the redirection, when I connect every thing are correctly redirect. why did you do that? If you don't redefine default locations of user's shell folders they will normally be part of your profile and would be stored on the server if roaming profiles are not disabled. It is generally not a very good idea to manipulate registries. But if you have a compelling reason to relocate user's shell folders to a network drive, then use your home directory for that instead of profile. For example, if I create a file named "textfile.txt" on my desktop, I see it on the shared folder. (I do a "ls" command with ssh directly on the server to be sure). I can add, remove, edit file on the desktop and every thing are OK. The problem come when I logout The window client do some sort of synchronization of a local folder with the shared folder. For example, C:\Documents and Seetings\admin\Desktop\ with \\MyServer\profiles\admin\Desktop. I fact, it's not a synchronization, it's just delete the shared folder and replace it by the content of the local folder. The result is that every modification done on the desktop (that are redirected) are lost at the logout. I believe that's how it's supposed to work. Purge the old profile and store the current one in its place. If you don't want it to be overwritten relocate it somewhere else. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] panic in pwnam_r after a reconnect
Is there some explanation for the panic in pwnam_r when a session reconnects after a while? This is an exagerated example. The user leaves on a Thursday, comes back next Tuesday - bang! My Samba 3.0.24 runs under a SuSE 10.1. The passwd files are used for authentication. [2007/03/15 17:27:44, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(1150) pmn12 (172.24.204.113) closed connection to service PRIMA [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/fault.c:fault_report(41) [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/fault.c:fault_report(42) INTERNAL ERROR: Signal 11 in pid 17526 (3.0.24-0.1.49-1172-SUSE-CODE10) Please read the Trouble-Shooting section of the Samba3-HOWTO [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/fault.c:fault_report(44) From: http://www.samba.org/samba/docs/Samba3-HOWTO.pdf [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/fault.c:fault_report(45) === [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/util.c:smb_panic(1599) PANIC (pid 17526): internal error [2007/03/20 11:08:31, 0] lib/util.c:log_stack_trace(1706) BACKTRACE: 30 stack frames: #0 /usr/sbin/smbd(log_stack_trace+0x1c) [0x55752bcc] #1 /usr/sbin/smbd(smb_panic+0x43) [0x55752cb3] #2 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x55741212] #3 /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x2b36fc6e4b20] #4 /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x2b36fc7a258f] #5 /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x2b36fc7a0857] #6 /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x2b36fc7a0bf6] #7 /lib64/libc.so.6(getpwnam_r+0x138) [0x2b36fc745c78] #8 /lib64/libc.so.6(getpwnam+0x70) [0x2b36fc7455a0] #9 /usr/sbin/smbd(getpwnam_alloc+0x4f) [0x55745c2f] #10 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5574566f] #11 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5574566f] #12 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5574566f] #13 /usr/sbin/smbd(Get_Pwnam_alloc+0x2a2) [0x55745942] #14 /usr/sbin/smbd(smb_getpwnam+0x7d) [0x5578f81d] #15 /usr/sbin/smbd(make_server_info_info3+0x199) [0x5578fd79] #16 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5578e507] #17 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5578ea56] #18 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x5578cc1e] #19 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x55789e5f] #20 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x55793ec6] #21 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x55655f7e] #22 /usr/sbin/smbd(ntlmssp_update+0x253) [0x556547c3] #23 /usr/sbin/smbd(auth_ntlmssp_update+0x2a) [0x55793bda] #24 /usr/sbin/smbd(reply_sesssetup_and_X+0x1651) [0x555f06c1] #25 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x55617c22] #26 /usr/sbin/smbd(smbd_process+0x720) [0x55618c00] #27 /usr/sbin/smbd(main+0xa0b) [0x557e594b] #28 /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf4) [0x2b36fc6d2154] #29 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x555b22a9] [2007/03/20 11:08:32, 0] lib/fault.c:dump_core(173) dumping core in /var/log/samba/cores/smbd [2007/03/20 12:04:29, 0] lib/fault.c:fault_report(41) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba Digest, Vol 45, Issue 29
You really meant 300 _M_bps as the upper bound according to Enterasys. My switches are from Enterasys too. After a firmware updates I get about 722 Mbps both ways. The client's disk drive (Maxtor 250 GB) can't read or write faster. If you don't get transfer rates in the immediate neighbourhood of the read/write speeds of your client's disk drives, then your network setup (hardware or configuration) is probably wrong. It's not easy to say what exactly is wrong. From: Doug VanLeuven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: samba@lists.samba.org Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:50:17 -0700 Subject: Re: [Samba] Transfer rates faster than 23MBps? OK, I'll top post. I can't let this stand unanswered. I ran a LOT of tests with gigabit copper and windows machines. I never did better than 40 seconds per gig. That was with the Intel cards configured for maximum cpu utilization. 80-90% cpu for 40 sec per gig. On windows. Uploads went half as fast. Asymetric. Of course I only had 32 bit PCI, 2.5Gig processor motherboards with 45MBps drives. Which leads me to my point. One can't rationally compare performance of gigabit ethernet without talking about hardware on the platforms. I wouldn't think you'd have overlooked this, but one can bump up against the speed of the disk drive. Raid has overhead. Have you tried something like iostat? Serial ATA? I seem to recall the folks at Enterasys indicating 300Gbps as a practical upper limit on copper gig. Are you using fiber? 64 bit PCI? Who made which model of the network card? Is it a network card that's well supported in Linux? Can you change the interrupt utilization of the card? What's the CPU utilization on the Redhat machine during transfers? I don't have specific answers for your questions, but one can't just say this software product is slower on gigabit than the other one without talking hardware at the same time. I have lots of memory. I use these configurations in sysctl.conf to up the performance of send/recieve windows on my systems. There's articles out there. I don't have historical references handy. YMMV. net.core.wmem_max = 1048576 net.core.rmem_max = 1048576 net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 65536 1048575 net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 524288 1048575 net.ipv4.tcp_window_scaling = 1 Regards, Doug > I wanted to follow up to my email to provide at least a partial answer > to my problem. > > The stock RedHat AS4-U3 Samba config has SO_SNDBUF and SO_RCVBUF set > to 8k. With this value, I can transfer a 1GB file in about 70-75 > seconds, about 14MBps. If I increase those buffers to their max value > of 64k, that same 1GB file transfers in 45-50 seconds, about 23MBps. > > That is the _ONLY_ configuration value I've found that made any > difference in my setup. All the other tweaks I'd done, when removed, > seemed to make no difference at all. I was playing with oplocks, > buffers, max xmit sizes, you name it. But the socket option buffers > was the only thing that made a difference. > > I'm still looking for more speed. I'll report if I find anything else > that helps. > > In response to Jeremy's suggestion of using smbclient, I ran a test > from a Linux client using smbclient and it reported a transfer rate of > 21MBps, about the same as a normal smbfs mount. I haven't tried > porting smbclient to Windows yet, and probably won't until we get more > info on what the server is doing. > > Thanks everyone. > > -Mark > > Mark Smith wrote: >> We use SMB to transfer large files (between 1GB and 5GB) from RedHat >> AS4 Content Storage servers to Windows clients with 6 DVD burners and >> robotic arms and other cool gadgets. The servers used to be Windows >> based, but we're migrating to RedHat for a host of reasons. >> >> Unfortunately, the RedHat Samba servers are about 2.5 times slower >> than the Windows servers. Windows will copy a 1GB file in about 30 >> seconds, where as it takes about 70 to 75 seconds to copy the same >> file from a RedHat Samba server. >> >> I've asked Dr. Google and gotten all kinds of suggestions, most of >> which have already been applied by RedHat to the stock Samba config. >> I've opened a ticket with RedHat. They pointed out a couple errors >> in my config, but fixing those didn't have any effect. Some >> tweaking, however, has gotten the transfer speed to about 50 seconds >> for that 1GB file. >> >> But I seem to have hit a brick wall; my fastest time ever was 44 >> seconds, but typically it's around 50. >> >> I know it's not a problem with network or disk; if I use Apache and >> HTTP to transfer the same file from the same server, it transfers in >> about 15 to 20 seconds. Unfortunately, HTTP doesn't meet our other >> requirements for random access to the file. >> >> Do you folks use Samba for large file transfers at all? Have you had >> any luck speeding it up past about 23MBps (the 44 second transfer >> speed)? Any help you may have would be fantastic. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instr
Re: [Samba] ftp 8x faster than samba
Rober Adkins wrote: Blaine Armsterd wrote: Robert Adkins wrote: Again, I suggest that you test like things with like things, test a Windows server's file sharing and then Samba file sharing. Test FTP on a Windows server and then FTP on a Linux server and do this on a controlled network where only the workstation and the server are connected via one hub that has no other network connected to it. That way you can more clearly determine which is faster. I tested the samve server and the same file over the same connection. There's 2 boxes on the switch here at my house. There's no more testing necessary. I can transfer the 723Mb file in 24 seconds using FTP. There's no reason for Samba to take over 2 minutes. Samba and FTP both have vastly differing overheads that affect the transfer of files. Samba (and Windows Server's Filesharing) will never equal FTP in performance. Neither will even come close. FTP is an entirely different protocol that is extremely loose and insecure. As a matter of fact, In a properly set up network there should be no significant difference in speed between FTP and Samba WHEN transfering large files. For tests I usually open a DOS window, change to a share and just time the copy command in both directions with "timethis.exe", like this: C:\> W: W:\> dir aBigFile 31.08.2006 00:11 184.751.471 aBigFile W:\> timethis copy aBigFile C:\Temp 1 File(s) copied. Elapsed Time : 00:00:16.877 W:\> timethis copy C:\Temp\aBigFile 1 File(s) copied. Elapsed Time : 00:00:16.573 which means about 11 megabytes in either direction. FTP won't give you any better speed over a 100 Mbps link from PC to switch. Even If you connect to a gigabit switch through a proper gigabit NIC and a good cable the limit will be the speed of client's disks. A single disk can't give you more than about 50-60 meggabytes per second with either FTP or Samba. Robert Adkins wrote: For example, if you are using ReiserFS, then you would see a marked increase in reading/writing and subsequently file sharing for relatively small files in, I believe, the sub-32kb range as ReiserFS is tuned for sharing many small files very quickly. However, ReiserFS (At least the last version I was using) wasn't great for serving large files, like the 700MB test file you are using. Reiserfs 3.6 serves big files via Samba just as fine as small files. In all my tests the bounds are the throughput rate of the network and the ability of the client's mass storage to absorb and emit data, not the Samba software or the file system used. So to come to the point, if someone says his FTP transfers run 8x faster than Samba, then he/she actually means to say that his/her Samba server provides only 1/8th of the available power. This usually means that that person's network is not configured properly. Unfortunately, saying "ftp 8x faster than samba" is insufficient diagnostic to be able to pinpoint the problem. Even the addition in quoted mail that there are a server a client and a switch between them just scratches the surface. There's a lot more details we don't know about the setup. My guess is that there is a problem in name resolution. Blaine, do you get same transfer times when using IP-adress and unqualified name? I mean if your server's name is "samba" and its IP-address is let's say "192.168.1.1", do you get the same speed/slowness when you use \\192.168.1.1\yourShare as when you use \\samba\yourShare ? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] DST is coming nigh - HELP!
Tomorrow morning my Central Europe will try to steal an hour of daylight by adding an extra hour at 2 am. This event will reintroduce an old but trivial show-stopper for the broader use of Samba. Microsoft has, perhaps intentionally, redefined the summer/winter time reckoning and just acknowledged in a KB article that, yes, MS Windows don't show the correct time, but they show the wrong time consistently and predictably, you have to live with that. No intention to ever comply with international standards. International standards are for wimps. I've simulated the event by adding yesterday a whole day to the calender of an isolated Samba domain consisting of a Samba 3.0.20b-3.1-SuSE server and a Windows XP Professional member client. This morning they both show an hour later, because they think it's Sunday already. I've created a local file on the client and a client's file on the Samba server yesterday and named them in the format "-MM-DD HH.MM.SS". Today the File Explorer shows that both files have been made an hour later than their names imply: NameSize Type Modified on \\p91\P\2006-03-25-16.32.25 0 KB 25-File 2006-03-25 17:32 C:\Temp\2006-03-25-16.29.51 0 KB 51-File 2006-03-25 17:29 and I could live with that, except that from within a DOS-Box as well as from within a bash shell the client's file on Samba server still appear to have the correct time: C:\>dir "\\p91\P\2006-03-25 16.32.25" 2006-03-25 16:32 0 2006-03-25 16.32.25 /p$ ll "2006-03-25 16.32.25" -rwxrw-rw- 1 c C 0 2006-03-25 16:32 2006-03-25 16.32.25 On the other hand, if I create a client's file on the Samba server now that they think it's already tomorrow, the DOS box and the bash shell will still see the same, correct, time C:\>dir "\\p91\P\2006-03-26 17.14.52" 26.03.2006 17:14 0 2006-03-26 17.14.52 /p$ ll "2006-03-26 17.14.52" -rwxrw-rw- 1 c C 0 2006-03-26 17:14 2006-03-26 17.14.52 But the File Explorer will beg to differ - it will add an hour to the client's filestamp on the Samba server: \\p91\P\2006-03-26-17.14.52 0 KB 52-File 03.26.2006 18:14 C:\Temp\2006-03-26-17.13.32 0 KB 32-File 03.26.2006 17:13 Sure, I can set my timezone tomorrow to Turkish TZ, EEST instead of CEST, so that the File Explorer, the most often used tool to explore the files under Windows, won't confuse the casual user, but any DOS batch file will call my bluff. Here's what happens in File Explorer: NameSize Type Modified on \\p91\P\2006-03-26 18.57.38 0 KB 38-File 2006-03-26 18:57 C:\Temp\2006-03-26 18.58.41 0 KB 41-File 2006-03-26 18:58 in DOS: C:\ dir "\\p91\P\2006-03-26 18.57.38" 26.03.2006 16:57 0 2006-03-26 18.57.38 in bash: /p $ ll "2006-03-26 18.57.38" -rwxrw-rw- 1 c C 0 2006-03-26 18:57 2006-03-26 18.57.38 Is there a clean way to let the Samba server deliver the timestamp as Windows would expect it instead of always being right ? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
>>> It's funny you should comment on this - I was in the middle >>> of moving to the Samba4 way of handling times and timezones >>> (back porting the Samba4 code to Samba3) to fix the timezone >>> problems people have. I was planning to get this into 3.0.21. >>> >>> Would this fix the problem ? I'm expecting so, but would >>> appreciate more feedback. >>> >>> I'll look back for the patch to remove the kludge GMT, but >>> I'd rather just remove it entirely and clean up the code. >> >> In a follow up to this - I'd like to get rid of the "time offset" >> parameter in 3.0.21 as part of the cleanup. Here is the definition : >> >> time offset (G) >>This parameter is a setting in minutes to add to >>the normal GMT to local time conversion. This is useful if >>you are serving a lot of PCs that have incorrect daylight >>saving time handling. >> >> I won't remove the parameter, just the effect it has in the >> timezone code. >> >> Please comment if you're using this parameter. > > Of course not. Things are not so clear-cut as I thought. The patch works, but there seems to be another interaction with Linux setting for the hardware clock: UTC vs. local time. I will test it more thorougly on a test machine and post again. -- 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 ?
>> 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 ;-) We do. You'd be surprised to learn that a GPOS is BEING used in one of those environments I facetiously mentioned and is certified for that by the same organisation that certifies roll-worthiness of road vehicles among other things. But the point is that we are oft in a "2b || !2b" dilemma when 2 different worldviews interface in public. Safety of the public should trump up esthetic objections, even sense of right and wrong. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
>>> From what I gathered in the documentations on both sides of the >>> fence, Unix traditionally stamps file times (create/status change, >>> modify and last read access) with a long integer (32 bits) counting >>> full seconds since midnight A.M. January 1, 1970 in Greenwhich, EU, >>> whereas the NT File System apparently uses a larger data type to >>> count decimicroseconds (or should I say hectonanoseconds) since >>> the same time of night in the said British village on January 1, >>> 1601, when it wants to stamp one of its own set of file times, >>> creation, content alteration, MFT change or last read access. >> >> I think the difference in timestamping is also the cause for the annoying bug >> >> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3124 > > I don't think this is the same bug - this looks like a difference > in the timstamps hold on the POSIX filesystem vs the NTFS one. It's not about daylight savings time switch but it is about the granularity of time keeping, is what Tom tried to say. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
>> From what I gathered in the documentations on both sides of the >> fence, Unix traditionally stamps file times (create/status change, >> modify and last read access) with a long integer (32 bits) counting >> full seconds since midnight A.M. January 1, 1970 in Greenwhich, EU, >> whereas the NT File System apparently uses a larger data type to >> count decimicroseconds (or should I say hectonanoseconds) since the >> same time of night in the said British village on January 1, 1601, >> when it wants to stamp one of its own set of file times, creation, >> content alteration, MFT change or last read access. > > I think the difference in timestamping is also the cause for the annoying bug > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3124 I concur. -- 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 ?
>> It's funny you should comment on this - I was in the middle >> of moving to the Samba4 way of handling times and timezones >> (back porting the Samba4 code to Samba3) to fix the timezone >> problems people have. I was planning to get this into 3.0.21. >> >> Would this fix the problem ? I'm expecting so, but would >> appreciate more feedback. >> >> I'll look back for the patch to remove the kludge GMT, but >> I'd rather just remove it entirely and clean up the code. > > In a follow up to this - I'd like to get rid of the "time offset" > parameter in 3.0.21 as part of the cleanup. Here is the definition : > > time offset (G) >This parameter is a setting in minutes to add to >the normal GMT to local time conversion. This is useful if >you are serving a lot of PCs that have incorrect daylight >saving time handling. > > I won't remove the parameter, just the effect it has in the > timezone code. > > Please comment if you're using this parameter. Of course not. -- 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 ?
>> Surprisingly few threads on this fascinating subject! >> (They're all in the Cc:) Only one solution proposed by Thomas >> Honigman and Thomas Guenther. In a posting of Feb 8, this year, >> they proposed conditioning the use of "kludge GMT", which is >> what Samba marshals on the wire as GMT but which is wrong under >> most circumstances involving daylight savings time switch, >> upon the value of the boolean smb.conf option "use kludge gmt", >> even using "TRUE" as default in order not to break the compatibility. >> >> Can anyone tell why this 9-months old proposal was not accepted ? >> >> I've implemented their patches (but made FALSE the default, >> of course) and it solved my problems big way. >> >> 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. >> >> Small details like this are show stoppers. > > It's funny you should comment on this - I was in the middle > of moving to the Samba4 way of handling times and timezones > (back porting the Samba4 code to Samba3) to fix the timezone > problems people have. I was planning to get this into 3.0.21. > > Would this fix the problem ? I'm expecting so, but would > appreciate more feedback. > > I'll look back for the patch to remove the kludge GMT, but > I'd rather just remove it entirely and clean up the code. Good to hear that you think the same way, Jeremy. A clean break is what I would suggest too, but since it would take a long time to propagate, perhaps something more eye catching, like the mentioned weird new option in smb.conf, even if the default should be FALSE, would be appropriate to draw attention to the fact that we're M$-compliant on that count. "Use kludge GMT" is perhaps not revealing enough, if not downright misleading. How about "Ape Microsoft's Daylight Savings Time bug = TRUE" for default and mentioning the value explicitly in checkparms? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
Surprisingly few threads on this fascinating subject! (They're all in the Cc:) Only one solution proposed by Thomas Honigman and Thomas Guenther. In a posting of Feb 8, this year, they proposed conditioning the use of "kludge GMT", which is what Samba marshals on the wire as GMT but which is wrong under most circumstances involving daylight savings time switch, upon the value of the boolean smb.conf option "use kludge gmt", even using "TRUE" as default in order not to break the compatibility. Can anyone tell why this 9-months old proposal was not accepted ? I've implemented their patches (but made FALSE the default, of course) and it solved my problems big way. 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. Small details like this are show stoppers. > ... the immediate cause was how file timestamps were > interpreted/presented by samba server as opposed to the expectations > of a Windows client. > > According to this M$ Article: > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/129574/en-us > > "When Windows NT automatically adjusts for daylight savings time, > the times on files on Windows NT file system (NTFS) partitions > and the events in the event logs are retroactively shifted by > one hour, even though the files and event records were created > before the daylight savings time change." > > In other words, Linux-based Samba servers keep on showing the right > time of the day when a file was created/changed/modified/accessed > whereas Windows falsifies it by an hour retroactively. But being > right is not enough. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Overloaded samba server. Is it a bug?
>> 1TB with reiserfs in LVM > > We have a similar installation: Kernel 2.6.5-7.201-smp (the official > kernel of SuSE 9.1 Professional) and we are using openldap and reiserfs > too. Additonally we are using quota on the filesystem. Our server hangs > often in this situation with a load of 350!!! The interesting part is > that the cpu's are 92% idle. If we deactivate the quota subsystem the > server will work for a longer time, but it could also happen that the > load reaches 350... Only a reboot will solve this problem... > > Martin: Which kernel are you using? Do you use quota on your filesystem? My 2 Eurocents: With the same setup I've had a similar problem when there was a slight inconsistency in the spelling of a user name in the group. Can you exclude the possibility that a user name is misspelled somewhere? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Wintertime/summertime difference - Samba servers show wrong time ?
When the Central European Time was last switched back to standard, at 03:00 last Sunday, the October 30th, a process died on one of my Windows clients with a mysterious "unknown error". When it was restarted it just went merrily on with its task. Luckily it wasn't part of a life support system. I found out that the immediate cause was how file timestamps were interpreted/presented by samba server as opposed to the expectations of a Windows client. According to this M$ Article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/129574/en-us "When Windows NT automatically adjusts for daylight savings time, the times on files on Windows NT file system (NTFS) partitions and the events in the event logs are retroactively shifted by one hour, even though the files and event records were created before the daylight savings time change." In other words, Linux-based Samba servers keep on showing the right time of the day when a file was created/changed/modified/accessed whereas Windows falsifies it by an hour retroactively. But being right is not enough. As much as I regret having to do it, I need a tweak to resynch the file times representation of my Samba servers with the expected and well-documented behaviour of Windows clients, even though it means lying through one's own teeth. As a matter of fact, I don't understand how this discrepancy is at all possible! >From what I gathered in the documentations on both sides of the fence, Unix traditionally stamps file times (create/status change, modify and last read access) with a long integer (32 bits) counting full seconds since midnight A.M. January 1, 1970 in Greenwhich, EU, whereas the NT File System apparently uses a larger data type to count decimicroseconds (or should I say hectonanoseconds) since the same time of night in the said British village on January 1, 1601, when it wants to stamp one of its own set of file times, creation, content alteration, MFT change or last read access. So basically both systems keep track of time in timezone-neutral units, different in scale and offset but essentially interchangeable within limits, and only interpret it as a certain time of day/night of this or that day of one or another month/year according to the user's locale. I can't imagine that an M$ SMB server (a Windows server or workstation) marshals anything else on the wire than the raw data type in the file stamp (the wrong time is in the eye of the client), so Samba has to be doing something wrong if the time stamp is perceived on the client side as not retroactively an hour earlier than it really was for a file which was manipulated in the interval between 03:00 a.m. on the first Sunday of April and 03:00 a.m. of the last Sunday of October when viewed from outside of this interval. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but also don't hesitate to let me know how to fix the problem, even if it was perhaps already discussed in the past. Yours truely -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
>> I was thinking of adding a repair action to the watchdog script >> that would identify the smbd PID keeping the *.ldb MS Access DB >> lock file open for so long and kill it, but the command "net rpc >> file" never lists what I can easily see on the status page of SWAT >> if I continuously refresh it until by chance one of the clients >> opens it. The "net rpc file" only lists >> >> 0 \PIPE\samr 0x35 0 dummy user >> >> all the time. Is there another CLI utility which lists the same >> thing as SWAT does? > > smbstatus list all connection and open file Much obliged, Stephane. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
I might have unwittingly made the impression that the problem only came with 3.0.20. The same problem was present in 3.0.14 as well as 3.0.4. It's a very intermittent problem which has been haunting me for months now. >>> Then it's not this particular bug. >> >> No, it ain't. There's a dangling *.ldb file there write now. But now there >> are 2 PIDs >> listed as holding the *.MDB file open with "DENY_DOS" and "RDWR" sharing >> both with the >> same timestamp "Fri Oct 14 19:58:09 2005", whereas formerly it used to be >> only one open >> of *.mdb and one of *.ldb file. The *.ldb file was opened "RDONLY" about 10 >> minutes >> earlier by one of the 2 contestants. Can I do some more forensic on the logs? > > Ok, if you can reproduce this bug with 3.0.20b then refresh me with the > problem > and then let's look at it closer. Yes. Of course. I've just compiled and installed 3.0.20b and set a watchdog to observe it. I was thinking of adding a repair action to the watchdog script that would identify the smbd PID keeping the *.ldb MS Access DB lock file open for so long and kill it, but the command "net rpc file" never lists what I can easily see on the status page of SWAT if I continuously refresh it until by chance one of the clients opens it. The "net rpc file only lists "0 \PIPE\samr 0x35 0 dummy user all the time. Is there another CLI utility which lists the same thing as SWAT does? Regards Dragan PS.: I've severely edited the verbosity of a samba log for the previous incident, so that the MS Access rain-dance can easily be followed to the point where the offending client for some reason reopens the lock file after once successfully opening it with numopen=1, meaning that nobody else claims it until he reopens it, when numopen increments to =2 for obvious readons, and then never remembers to close it the same number of times. It might be one of those MS tricks to scare the users off Samba? Would you like to take a look at it, if I send it to you off-samba-list? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
>> I might have unwittingly made the impression that the problem only came with >> 3.0.20. >> The same problem was present in 3.0.14 as well as 3.0.4. It's a very >> intermittent >> problem which has been haunting me for months now. > > Then it's not this particular bug. No, it ain't. There's a dangling *.ldb file there write now. But now there are 2 PIDs listed as holding the *.MDB file open with "DENY_DOS" and "RDWR" sharing both with the same timestamp "Fri Oct 14 19:58:09 2005", whereas formerly it used to be only one open of *.mdb and one of *.ldb file. The *.ldb file was opened "RDONLY" about 10 minutes earlier by one of the 2 contestants. Can I do some more forensic on the logs? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
> Where is this patch, I would like to update my server to 3.0.20a,
> but if there are some problem with Access DB Lock Files, I prefer
> to patche samba before compiling.
You can find the patches for 3.0.20 and 3.0.20a in Jeremy's first
answer to my question, but for your convenience here they are:
For 3.0.20
--- smbd/open.c 2005-07-28 06:19:42.0 -0700
+++ smbd/open.c.new 2005-10-10 09:32:25.0 -0700
@@ -1585,13 +1585,6 @@
fsp_open =
open_file(fsp,conn,fname,psbuf,flags|flags2,unx_mode,access_mask);
- if (!fsp_open && (flags == O_RDWR) && (errno != ENOENT)) {
- if((fsp_open = open_file(fsp,conn,fname,psbuf,
-O_RDONLY,unx_mode,access_mask)) ==
True) {
- flags = O_RDONLY;
- }
- }
-
if (!fsp_open) {
if(file_existed) {
unlock_share_entry(conn, dev, inode);
For 3.0.20a
--- smbd/open.c 2005-09-29 14:52:40.0 -0700
+++ smbd/open.c.new 2005-10-06 21:45:37.0 -0700
@@ -1585,22 +1585,6 @@
fsp_open =
open_file(fsp,conn,fname,psbuf,flags|flags2,unx_mode,access_mask);
- if (!fsp_open && (flags2 & O_EXCL) && (errno == EEXIST)) {
- /*
-* Two smbd's tried to open exclusively, but only one of them
-* succeeded.
-*/
- file_free(fsp);
- return NULL;
- }
-
- if (!fsp_open && (flags == O_RDWR) && (errno != ENOENT)) {
- if((fsp_open = open_file(fsp,conn,fname,psbuf,
-O_RDONLY,unx_mode,access_mask)) ==
True) {
- flags = O_RDONLY;
- }
- }
-
if (!fsp_open) {
if(file_existed) {
unlock_share_entry(conn, dev, inode);
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
>> I have an intermittent problem with dangling MS Access DB lock files. >> >> In a productive environment with N batch queus (each on a separate >> Windows XP Professional) a scheduler PC dispatches the work load to >> a free queue by means of modifying a simple MS Access DB file called >> "PRIM.mdb", which resides on a Samba 3.0.20 share. Each free >> queue PC polls the same MS Access DB file every 60 seconds to see >> if there is a work packet to be executed by it. If there is a work >> package for it it modifies a state value of the respective work packet >> in this DB when it starts executing it as well as after the job has >> been done so that the scheduler knows what's going on. > > There's a bug in 3.0.20 that might affect this (btw it's also in > 3.0.20a). I know about it because it's my fault :-(. > > Here's the patch for 3.0.20, and 3.0.20a. > > Jeremy. Thank you, Jeremy. I might have unwittingly made the impression that the problem only came with 3.0.20. The same problem was present in 3.0.14 as well as 3.0.4. It's a very intermittent problem which has been haunting me for months now. I have compiled your patches and installed it on the affected samba server and the first obvious difference is that when either the *.mdb or *.ldb file is opened then the "Sharing" attribute in the "Open Files" section of the status page is now "DENY_DOS" instead of "DENY_NONE". (I can catch the moment when they're opend if I keep refreshing the status often enough.) I hope that no lock file will dangle any more. I'll keep you posted. Best regards Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Dangling MS Access DB Lock Files *.ldb
I have an intermittent problem with dangling MS Access DB lock files. In a productive environment with N batch queus (each on a separate Windows XP Professional) a scheduler PC dispatches the work load to a free queue by means of modifying a simple MS Access DB file called "PRIM.mdb", which resides on a Samba 3.0.20 share. Each free queue PC polls the same MS Access DB file every 60 seconds to see if there is a work packet to be executed by it. If there is a work package for it it modifies a state value of the respective work packet in this DB when it starts executing it as well as after the job has been done so that the scheduler knows what's going on. As I understand the MS Access API a client creates a lock file "PRIM.ldb" whenever it wishes to modify the DB file "PRIM.mdb". >From time to time, but generally not very often, a lock file is dropped by either a queue PC or by scheduler. Therefore no one can modify the DB file until the lock file is removed. The linux utility "lsof" can't see that the lock file is opened by any process but the status page of SWAT always lists it under "Open Files" with the smbd PID of the client which last opened it, with "Sharing" declared "DENY_NONE", "R/W" as "RDWR", "Oplock" is "NONE" (oplocks=no), full path name under "File" and the timestamp of the last access under "Date". The lock file can only be removed by super user root but if the smbd process which holds it open is killed, then the problem is also solved sometimes even without removing the lock file itself. I have inspected the samba log files and identified the point at which this happens recently. To make things simpler I've removed much of the samba verbosity in the following overview of the offending client's actions (mdb is the MS Access DB file and ldb is the respective lock file): 23:55:53close mdb 1 close ldb 0 23:55:54openldb ro 1 openmdb rw 2 openldb rw 3 23:55:55close mdb 1 Share violation on PRIM.mdb, flags=2 openmdb rw 2 No other client was active at the time so there is no racing here. Only the offending client loses track of the lock file and forgets about it. Has anyone had a similar problem and lived to talk about it? Any hints? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Problems uploading printer drivers
> didnt you see my post before.. > >> 1) browse to the samba server in windows xp >> 2) double click on "Printers & Faxes" >> 3) right click on some blank window area and select "Server Properties" => > = wrong, > right = select a printer queue, right klik and first klik NO !!! What do you mean "select a printer queue, right klik and first klik NO !!!" ? What do you mean "klik NO" ? Where's "NO" ? If I select a printer queue and right klick, it gives me a range of choices, Open, Connect, Stop printer, Share, Create Link, Delete, Rename and Properties, but there is no "NO". The only choice that would present me with a choice between "Yes" and "No" is if I klick "Delete" and it asks "Are you sure?". -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: McAfee 8 incompatible with Samba
>> Since I've updated McAfee to version 8 many applications >> which open file chooser dialogs report "Access denied" >> when trying to open a Samba share, including the users's >> own home directory. > > Is this the version of McAfee that includes a Windows firewall program? I > find it's necessary to tell it to trust the local subnet (or, at very least, > the PDC and any fileservers) to get anything to work right in a domain > setting. It took me forever to figure this out the first time I tried to > join a McAfee-infested machine to our domain. A very good hint, David. Stil, I don't install the firewall explicitly because all of the boxes are behind a firewall anyway. This "Access denied" error comes up even if all of the components of McAfee are disabled. Only a deinstall helps. But perhaps I should go with the flow and let the firewall install with the rest and then configure it as you suggested. I'll keep you posted. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: McAfee 8 incompatible with Samba
>> I've parsed a whole year's worth of postings in this group >> and didn't find any previous reference to the problem. >> >> Since I've updated McAfee to version 8 many applications >> which open file chooser dialogs report "Access denied" >> when trying to open a Samba share, including the users's >> own home directory. > > We use McAffe8 against samba shares for ages, and have never seen this. Yes, likewise I've been using a previous version of McAfee and never seen this. But, where have you looked? If you use Windows Explorer all's fine. But if you happen to have Lotus Notes and try to save an attachment or attach a file and you open the file chooser dialog, it brings the error immediately. At install time there is an option to leave Lotus Notes alone. In that case there is no problem. But then there is a webapp we use, which lets you download the on-screen reports in different formats, e.g. PDF or Excel, whatever, and when you try to open the samba share, bang, access denied, and there's nothing in the logs to suggest that anything went wrong. Should I tell McAfee it should leave Internet Explorer alone because it's safe`? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] McAfee 8 incompatible with Samba
I've parsed a whole year's worth of postings in this group and didn't find any previous reference to the problem. Since I've updated McAfee to version 8 many applications which open file chooser dialogs report "Access denied" when trying to open a Samba share, including the users's own home directory. At installation one can choose to exclude some apps from the shield, e.g. Lotus Notes, but if I have to exclude MS Internet Explorer, which is the app for many web apps, then the very purpose of a virus shield is defeated. Is there some better way to configure such problems out? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] user's smbd process generates high cpu utilization
> We have a problem where occasionally (couple of times > a day to a couple of times a week) a user smbd process > pegs the cpu, causing login failures for other users. If you dig a little further back in the Samba archives you may find a thread of mine that sounds suspiciously like your itch. The cause of the problem (high cpu usage for some users) was an inconsistency in the passwd/group a slightly wrong spelling of a user name, IIRC. The thread ends with some shell and awk scripts to help check the files for possible inconcistencies. Perhaps it is not relevant for you since you are using ldap instead of files, but who knows? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Participation on Samba lists
>> Regardless of what is going on this is not right in my opinion. >> "So we're going to ban Luke from posting to the Samba Lists for three months" >> >> There must be another way to work things out. > Open to suggestions. We've been trying and they haven't been > working out. This was the action of last resort and we regret having > to resort to it. But we ran out of options. This has been going > on for a long time. My suggestion is, you lift the ban. It just doesn't sound right. It is censorship. We do tolerate all kinds of trolls who quote a lengthy letter for no reason other than to approve of its content, so what's so disruptive in Luke's letter? I personally tried to read Luke's letter but gave up on issues of style, terseness and casing. I'd rather Luke had contributed some new code instead. But banning him is not right. As another suggestion, why don't you create a separate samba mail list "samba-politics" and advise a contributor who doesn't stick to samba-user problems that he/she/it is off-topic? I don't have a problem to skip a posting I'm not interested in. I do have a problem, if someone does it for me. Cheers Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Migrate BACK to WINDOWS -> Talk me out of it QUICK
If you can't be more specific than "Combine whatever is fitting best to your need and the users needs", I don't see what your point is. > i see no problem to have > different kinds of servers in one Network, if it makes sense > from the desired needs, > i have serveral Terminal servers and a samba pdc, > in different offices and locations. > I would warn to make a pseudo religios > discussion out of that. > Combine whatever is fitting best to your and the users needs. > for file services i would preffer samba ever. > >> I think I'm clear about what this young Jedi knight >> is asking. His conundrum is that he'll end up with >> way too many servers if he implements both a Windows >> Terminal Server and a Samba file and printer server >> on separate machines. Centralizing the Terminal Server >> on a big machine would entail dramatic traffic load on >> his thin 1/2 T-1 wire, even if he leaves one Samba >> server on each site for files and printing. So basically >> he asks: Does it not make more sense to just add file >> and print services to the MS Windows Terminal Servers ? >> >> And the answer is: Of course, it doesnt! >> You don't wanna be on the wrong side of the Force, >> do you, Chris? >> >> The way I see it, Chris should put his w2k3 in a >> vmware sandbox on his quad opteron samba server, >> ideally. Then install some NX magic and live >> happily ever after, with one central Samba server, >> (+ stand-by) subleting a couple of w2k3 avatars >> under vmware. Or vice versa. >> >> Let the Force be with you, >> Yoda >> >> >>>sorry but i am not clear what is your Question? >>> >>> Not thinking about migrating back due to issues, it is more due to implementation needs and a little situation I have been wrestling with for a bit now, and would love some feedback First a little history: We currently have 10 locations connected via a dedicated 1/2 T-1. Last year I migrated from a WINNT domain to a Samba/LDAP domain. It has been running great. Basically did this for license reasons as well as reduced administrative horror. NOW: We have just started to roll out Thinstation thin-clients that are connecting to Win TSRV servers. What is being planned is 1 Terminal Server per location. This will significantly reduce the adminstrative nightmare on multiple Windows boxes and centralize it. However, this is where I start to feel that I am having too many servers per location, seeing that the windows server could do what the Samba server is doing, I am in debate about moving back to windows (I have will need to licenses and boxes there anyhows) One other option is just ot house a ginormous WIN-TSRV at the central location. However, I am afraid of issues with printing back to the remote locations (pushing large files through the 1/2 T-1 to print). A Another option is to remove the samba servers from the remote location, and just have a samba PDC with authenticating windows tsrv machines. - I dont like this option for some reason I really dont want to move away from the SAMBA backend, but at the same time dont want to stay with it just because I 'like it' and I 'want to'. So I am looking for discussion/arguements as to why I should stay with the Samba server and a win-tsrv server, as opposed to just moving to a MS backend. Please Obi-won Kenobi, you are our only help! thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Migrate BACK to WINDOWS -> Talk me out of it QUICK
I think I'm clear about what this young Jedi knight is asking. His conundrum is that he'll end up with way too many servers if he implements both a Windows Terminal Server and a Samba file and printer server on separate machines. Centralizing the Terminal Server on a big machine would entail dramatic traffic load on his thin 1/2 T-1 wire, even if he leaves one Samba server on each site for files and printing. So basically he asks: Does it not make more sense to just add file and print services to the MS Windows Terminal Servers ? And the answer is: Of course, it doesnt! You don't wanna be on the wrong side of the Force, do you, Chris? The way I see it, Chris should put his w2k3 in a vmware sandbox on his quad opteron samba server, ideally. Then install some NX magic and live happily ever after, with one central Samba server, (+ stand-by) subleting a couple of w2k3 avatars under vmware. Or vice versa. Let the Force be with you, Yoda > sorry but i am not clear what is your Question? > >> Not thinking about migrating back due to issues, >> it is more due to implementation needs and a little >> situation I have been wrestling with for a bit now, >> and would love some feedback >> >> First a little history: >> >> We currently have 10 locations connected via a >> dedicated 1/2 T-1. Last year I migrated from a >> WINNT domain to a Samba/LDAP domain. It has been >> running great. Basically did this for license >> reasons as well as reduced administrative horror. >> >> NOW: >> >> We have just started to roll out Thinstation >> thin-clients that are connecting to Win TSRV servers. >> What is being planned is 1 Terminal Server per location. >> This will significantly reduce the adminstrative >> nightmare on multiple Windows boxes and centralize it. >> However, this is where I start to feel that I am having >> too many servers per location, seeing that the windows >> server could do what the Samba server is doing, >> I am in debate about moving back to windows >> (I have will need to licenses and boxes there anyhows) >> >> One other option is just ot house a ginormous WIN-TSRV >> at the central location. However, I am afraid of issues >> with printing back to the remote locations >> (pushing large files through the 1/2 T-1 to print). >> >> A Another option is to remove the samba servers from the >> remote location, and just have a samba PDC with >> authenticating windows tsrv machines. - I dont like this >> option for some reason >> >> I really dont want to move away from the SAMBA backend, >> but at the same time dont want to stay with it just because >> I 'like it' and I 'want to'. So I am looking for >> discussion/arguements as to why I should stay with the >> Samba server and a win-tsrv server, as opposed to >> just moving to a MS backend. >> >> Please Obi-won Kenobi, you are our only help! thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] file context menu takes for ever with 3.0.6,bothserne tand suse
A sort of wrap-up coda to the discussion off this thread: > I've tested SerNet's ans SuSE's versions of Samba 3.0.6 > on a test member server. Joining domain, attaching share > all works but if I right-click a file, the context menu > takes for ever to pop up. If I select Properties, it > takes even longer until the dialog box appears. Are these XP clients? >>> >>> I should have mentioned it. >>> No, the problem affects both XP and w2k >>> Try setting "large readwrite = no" (be sure to restart the client on a new smbd or you won't know for sure) and see if that changes the behaviour. I have several systems with the same exact issues you describe. Changing that value helped me...I'm hoping Jeremy can help me understand why in an email I sent to samba-technical. >>> >>> Thanks, Bill. I'll try both your suggestion and Jeremy's >>> sendfile hint first thing in the morning. >> >> Setting "large readwrite = no" has a dramatic impact but not the >> one desired. After mounting the share the icon was that of a dir >> instead of that of a shared drive. Clicking on it turned the cursor >> to an hourglass for a long time and after about 30s there was the >> correct icon for shared drive but also a pop-up error message: >> >>"X:\ cannot be accessed. >> The network name is no more available." >> >> On the other hand setting "use sendfile = no" solved the problem >> entirely. >> >> Thank you Jeremy >> > > I'm replying off-list. I'm glad to hear the sendfile worked for you, > but I'm curious, do you have TCP_NODELAY in your socket options? > and what are the values for SO_SNDBUV and SO_RCVBUF? what does > "no -a" show for your tcp send and receive bufs. I know Suse is > different from AIX, I'm just trying to understand by how much ;-) socket options include SO_KEEPALIVE IPTOS_LOWDELAY and TCP_DELAY on my systems. What command is meant by "no" as in "no -a"? I don't find it on my Linux. > did you try "large readwrite = no" with sendfile on or off? > I'm just really curious because my system just FLEW after that > change, but I have TCP_NODELAY SO_SNDBUF=262144 SO_RCVBUF=262144 > and have the "no" options tuned accordingly. I dealt with both modifications separately. I'll give it a try jointly + your 256k buffers just to see if it makes a dent. But "no" options can't be tuned on my system. Must be an AIX-specific utility, something like "network options", which one sets in different sysconfig files on Linux ... ... Yes you're right. Both options suppressed, "use sendfile" as well as "large readwrite", solved the problem just as well as "don't use sendfile" alone did, except it appears to be markedly prompter. I need more tests to be sure about the latter. > AIX does not have sendfile. > > When I turned large r/w off, my system stopped sending in 32KB > chunks and returned to the "max xmit=16644" default and then my > clients were quite happy. Has anyone else been experimenting with large SND and RCV BUFs ? What are the experiences? Or drawbacks? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] file context menu takes for ever with 3.0.6, bothsernetand suse
>>> I've tested SerNet's ans SuSE's versions of Samba 3.0.6 >>> on a test member server. Joining domain, attaching share >>> all works but if I right-click a file, the context menu >>> takes for ever to pop up. If I select Properties, it >>> takes even longer until the dialog box appears. >> >> Are these XP clients? > > I should have mentioned it. > No, the problem affects both XP and w2k > >> Try setting "large readwrite = no" (be sure to restart the client on a new >> smbd or you won't know for sure) and see if that changes the behaviour. >> I have several systems with the same exact issues you describe. Changing >> that value helped me...I'm hoping Jeremy can help me understand why in an >> email I sent to samba-technical. > > Thanks, Bill. I'll try both your suggestion and Jeremy's sendfile hint > first thing in the morning. Setting "large readwrite = no" has a dramatic impact but not the one desired. After mounting the share the icon was that of a dir instead of that of a shared drive. Clicking on it turned the cursor to an hourglass for a long time and after about 30s there was the correct icon for shared drive but also a pop-up error message: "X:\ cannot be accessed. The network name is no more available." On the other hand setting "use sendfile = no" solved the problem entirely. Thank you Jeremy -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] file context menu takes for ever with 3.0.6, both sernetand suse
>> I've tested SerNet's ans SuSE's versions of Samba 3.0.6 >> on a test member server. Joining domain, attaching share >> all works but if I right-click a file, the context menu >> takes for ever to pop up. If I select Properties, it >> takes even longer until the dialog box appears. > > i had serveral failures in the past with sernet rpm s > try suse samba rpms for 8.1 > ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/samba/3.0/i386/ SerNet's rpms were quite up-to-date. Until 3.0.6 I had no problems with their builds. Unfortunately, the same problem affects SuSE's own rpms as well. Did you actuall mean that I should use 8.1 rpm for my 8.2 system? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] file context menu takes for ever with 3.0.6, both sernetand suse
>> I've tested SerNet's ans SuSE's versions of Samba 3.0.6 >> on a test member server. Joining domain, attaching share >> all works but if I right-click a file, the context menu >> takes for ever to pop up. If I select Properties, it >> takes even longer until the dialog box appears. > > Are these XP clients? I should have mentioned it. No, the problem affects both XP and w2k > Try setting "large readwrite = no" (be sure to restart the client on a new > smbd or you won't know for sure) and see if that changes the behaviour. > I have several systems with the same exact issues you describe. Changing > that value helped me...I'm hoping Jeremy can help me understand why in an > email I sent to samba-technical. Thanks, Bill. I'll try both your suggestion and Jeremy's sendfile hint first thing in the morning. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] file context menu takes for ever with 3.0.6, both sernet and suse
I've tested SerNet's ans SuSE's versions of Samba 3.0.6 on a test member server. Joining domain, attaching share all works but if I right-click a file, the context menu takes for ever to pop up. If I select Properties, it takes even longer until the dialog box appears. Right-clicking a directory pops up the context menu without delay and the Properties dialog box also comes fast, but files are very lazy. The smb.conf (as well as the SuSE 8.2) is a clone of another hardwarewise identical member server's configuration file with only the name of the server changed accordingly. The problem does not occur with samba 3.0.4. What's wrong? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Re: copying over an existing file when not owner
|> If I try to copy a file to a samba share which |> already contains an earlier version of the same |> file, the file will still belong to me and the |> date will be the date of the source file. |> |> But if I copy a file over an existing homonymous |> file which belongs to someone else, then the file |> will still belong to that other user but the date |> will be the date at the moment of copying. | | Try setting 'dos filetimes = yes'. See the smb.conf(5) | man page for details. Read the darned manual. Thank you, Gerald. I must have mixed "dos filetimes" with the notion of dos time resolution. It solves my problem and it says so. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: copying over an existing file when not owner
> SuSE 8.2/Samba 3.0.4-SerNet-SuSE > > One expects file's owner and date to be preserved > when copying a file to an SMB share. But if a file > with the same name is already there, there are two > different results as to who will ultimately own the > new file and what date will be stamped depending > upon whether the file belongs to the copier or to > someone else. > > If I try to copy a file to a samba share which > already contains an earlier version of the same > file, the file will still belong to me and the > date will be the date of the source file. > > But if I copy a file over an existing homonymous > file which belongs to someone else, then the file > will still belong to that other user but the date > will be the date at the moment of copying. > > I've noticed that in both cases an overwritten > file keeps the same i-Node number (xfs), which is > a little unexpected. I'd expect the old file to be > deleted and a new one created but perhaps > accidentally it's always the same free i-Node > which gets assigned to it. > > Is there a way to correct this behaviour? > > I mean, if a file with the same name gets overwritten > by copying it should belong to the copier and carry > its original modification date, not the update time. Just in case a more recent version of samba should be proposed, I've tested SuSE 3.0.5 and SerNet-SuSE 3.0.6 as well and the behaviour is always the same wrong one. This behaviour breaks the propagation of updates in some applications because they erroneously depend upon datestamp instead of a CRC or similar, but it is also an incompatibility to an MS SMB server. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] copying over an existing file when not owner
SuSE 8.2/Samba 3.0.4-SerNet-SuSE One expects file's owner and date to be preserved when copying a file to an SMB share. But if a file with the same name is already there there are two different ways as to who will ultimately own the new file and what date will be stamped depending upon whether the file belongs to the copier or to someone else. If I try to copy a file to a samba share which already contains an earlier version of the same file, the file will still belong to me and the date will be the date of the source file. But if I copy a file over an existing homonymous file which belongs to someone else, then the file fill still belong to that other user but the date will be the date at the moment of copying. I've noticed that in both cases an overwritten file keeps the same i-Node number (xfs), which is a little unexpected. I'd expect the old file to be deleted and a new one created but perhaps accidentally it's always the same free i-Node which gets assigned to it. Is there a way to correct this behaviour? I mean, if a file with the same name gets overwritten by copying it should belong to the copier and carry its original modification date, not the update time. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load> 4
>> I checked my /etc/group for irregular entries and repaired >> all of them. Since then the problem didn't occur any more. >> Even so it wasn't very frequent. >> >> I still have a bunch of strace logs of smbd and of nscd. >> Cann I upload it somewhere for you if you can use it? >> >> Or do you suggest to replant the erroneous entries and >> wait for the loop ? > > Actually if you could add one erroneous entry and catch it > in gdb in the act of looping that would be very helpful. I'm > still trying to determine if the bug is in glibc or smbd. Noblesse oblige. OK. I've never debugged runaway programs. Does it stay still when I attach it? Should I compile a debug version for that? Can you be just a little more specific as to what I should try to clarify? You seem to believe, that it is not looping in samba sources, because you can't see where it possibly could. So probably, if the attached process can be stepped, I should step a full circle between two socket calls and see if it ever lands back in samba code. Is that it? Cheers - Diese E-Mail könnte vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht gestattet. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Antwort: Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
>> Bingo! It is exactly the same case.
>> Two user names were spelled out slightly wrong
>> in the /etc/group. As a consequence,
>> under certain circumstances the "smbd" process
>> keeps trying to resolve the name and doesn't
>> take "no" from "nscd" for an answer.
>> Each "smbd" process is looping around
>> these 5 system calls:
>> 1) create a socket,
>> 2) connect to nscd's socket,
>> 3) write the mis-spelled name,
>> 4) read negative answer
>> 5) close socket:
>>
>>socket(PF_UNIX,SOCK_STREAM,0)=26
>>connect(26,{sa_family=AF_UNIX,path="/var/run/.nscd_socket"},110)=0
>>writev(26,[{"\2\0...\0\22\0...",12},{"GeorgeDubbyaBusch\0",18}],2)=30
>>read(26,"\2\0\0\...\0\377\377\377\377\377\377"...,36)=36
>>close(26)=0
>>
>> and the nscds spin like this
>>
>>poll({fd=3,events=POLLRDNORM,revents=POLLRDNORM}],1,-1)=1
>>accept(3,,NULL)=9
>>read(9,"\2\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\22\0\0\0",12)=12
>>read(9,"GeorgeDubbyaBusch\0",18)=18
>>write(9,"\2\0\...\0\377\377\377\377\377\377"...,36=36
>>close(9)=0
>>
>> Since both mis-spelled names are among the
>> earliest user names in 2 most frequently used
>> groups (one is "users"), it's hard to tell
>> why the smbd processes spin out of control so
>> infrequently. Jeremy will know more about that.
>
> Ok, looking at the code in 3.0 there is no loop around the
> lookup for a bad user name. The code in question is here:
>
> for (gr = grp->gr_mem; (*gr != NULL) && ((*gr)[0] != '\0'); gr += 1)
{
> struct passwd *pw = getpwnam(*gr);
>
> if (pw == NULL)
> continue;
> add_uid_to_array_unique(pw->pw_uid, uids, num);
> }
>
> Note that if pw == NULL then the name should be skipped and
> the next entry examined. This code is not looping on bad lookups
> within smbd.
>
> Is it possible to attach to the smbd in question with gdb and
> walk through this code with a bad username in the group entry
> list and see if the getpwnam call ever returns NULL or just
> loops inside glibc ?
I checked my /etc/group for irregular entries and repaired
all of them. Since then the problem didn't occur any more.
Even so it wasn't very frequent.
I still have a bunch of strace logs of smbd and of nscd.
Cann I upload it somewhere for you if you can use it?
Or do you suggest to replant the erroneous entries and
wait for the loop ?
Cheers
-
Diese E-Mail könnte vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte
Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder
diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den
Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die
unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht gestattet.
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
e-mail is strictly forbidden.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Antwort: Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
Dragan Krnic
DB Fernverkehr AG
P
955 - 7166
Internetauftritt der Deutschen Bahn AG >> http://www.bahn.de
Dragan Krnic
07.07.2004 20:50
An:
Hansjoerg.Maurer, jra
Kopie:
samba
Blindkopie:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thema:
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's =
100% CPU; load > 4
---
As an epilogue, here's a little script to find out if there are
any usernames in /etc/group which don't correspond to an
existing user:
ungroup.awk < /etc/group | sort -r | \
regroup.awk | while read i;\
do id $i > /dev/null;\
done 2>&1 | \
grep -v :x: | sort
Whereby "ungroup.awk" is
#!/bin/awk -f
{ partsNo = split ( $0, partString, ":" );
namesNo = split ( partString[4], userName, "," );
printf ( "%s:%s:%s:\n", partString[1], partString[2], partString[3]
);
for ( i = 1;i <= namesNo; i++ )
printf ( "%s:%s\n", partString[1], userName[i]);
}
and "regroup.awk" is
#!/bin/awk -f
{ partsNo = split ( $0, partString, ":" );
if ( partsNo == 2 )
printf ( "%s\n", partString[2] );
else
printf ( "%s\n", $0 );
}
Feel free to make it better but it did find 5 more users
which are either no more on the books
or their names are ever so slightly different.
This is of course a temporary cure for bad bookkeeping,
until Jeremy finds out why such innocuous causes
have such drastic consequences and fixes it. Or doesn't.
Cheers
>>>>>>> the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work fine
>>>>>>> except that from time to time but at least a couple
>>>>>>> of times a day one or more smbd processes start
>>>>>>> running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes
>>>>>>> then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80%
>>>>>>> users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure that each such process is just idling,
>>>>>>> but why does it engage so much nscd processing?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es)
>>>>>>> the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1
>>>>>>> no perceptible CPU%.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone know what's happening?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to
>>>>>> a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole?
>>>>> OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow).
>>>>>
>>>> A pot watched never boils.
>>>> But as soon as it happens again, I'll consult
>>>> strace and gdb to see how and why it happens.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It does, when you stop watching.
>>> I was away yesterday and what do I see
>>> this morning:
>>>
>>>top - 09:55:35 up 6 days, 17:28, 6 users, load average: 3.59,
3.82, 3.15
>>>Tasks: 182 total, 3 running, 179 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
>>>Cpu
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
>>> the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work fine >>> except that from time to time but at least a couple >>> of times a day one or more smbd processes start >>> running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes >>> then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% >>> users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. >>> >>> I'm sure that each such process is just idling, >>> but why does it engage so much nscd processing? >>> >>> As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) >>> the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 >>> no perceptible CPU%. >>> >>> Does anyone know what's happening? >>> >> What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to >> a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ? >> > Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole? > OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow). > A pot watched never boils. But as soon as it happens again, I'll consult strace and gdb to see how and why it happens. >>> >>> It does, when you stop watching. >>> I was away yesterday and what do I see >>> this morning: >>> >>>top - 09:55:35 up 6 days, 17:28, 6 users, load average: 3.59, 3.82, 3.15 >>>Tasks: 182 total, 3 running, 179 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie >>>Cpu(s): 21.6% user, 78.4% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle >>>Mem: 2060704k total, 2004324k used,56380k free, 185272k buffers >>>Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1068752k cached >>> >>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command >>>12808 robf 25 0 2996 2596 2244 R 23.6 0.1 4:46.98 smbd >>>12741 robf 22 0 3028 2628 2280 R 20.6 0.1 5:44.55 smbd >>> 2354 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 15.3 0.0 150:31.23 nscd >>> 2356 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 14.9 0.0 150:35.87 nscd >>> 2352 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 9.0 0.0 151:14.08 nscd >>> 2353 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:39.89 nscd >>> 2355 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:31.82 nscd >>> 2350 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 3.7 0.0 150:49.78 nscd >>> >>> I attached both of the smbd processes to gdb and >>> backtrace was always: >>> >>>#0 0x402e5328 in read () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>>#1 0x40343b90 in __DTOR_END__ () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>>#2 0x4031d58b in __nscd_getpwnam_r () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>>#3 0x402c130d in getpwnam_r@@GLIBC_2.1.2 () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>>#4 0x402c0e6f in getpwnam () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>>#5 0x081298fd in get_memberuids () >>>#6 0x08129b09 in _samr_query_groupmem () >>>#7 0x081215d1 in api_samr_query_groupmem () >>>#8 0x081358b2 in api_rpcTNP () >>>#9 0x08135632 in api_pipe_request () >>>#10 0x0812fc10 in process_request_pdu () >>>#11 0x0812fdec in process_complete_pdu () >>>#12 0x08130069 in process_incoming_data () >>>#13 0x08130220 in write_to_internal_pipe () >>>#14 0x081301a4 in write_to_pipe () >>>#15 0x080883e0 in api_fd_reply () >>>#16 0x080885b9 in named_pipe () >>>#17 0x080891bc in reply_trans () >>>#18 0x080c80e0 in switch_message () >>>#19 0x080c8172 in construct_reply () >>>#20 0x080c8491 in process_smb () >>>#21 0x080c9004 in smbd_process () >>>#22 0x081f812e in main () >>>#23 0x402268ae in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>> >>> After killing both smbd processes with -9 the top soon >>> stabilizes at: >>> >>>top - 10:12:01 up 6 days, 17:45, 6 users, load average: 0.03, 0.19, 1.17 >>>Tasks: 175 total, 2 running, 173 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie >>>Cpu(s): 0.0% user, 0.7% system, 0.0% nice, 99.3% idle >>>Mem: 2060704k total, 2034272k used,26432k free, 185272k buffers >>>Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1100020k cached >>> >>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ Command >>>15182 root 15 0 956 956 700 R 0.3 0.0 0:03.67 top >>> >>> Unfortunately I didn't trace the nscd processes. >>> What a shame! I'll do it next time. >>> >>> Nobody complained yet about reduced performance. >>> >>> It's hard to tell when this behaviour started. >>> The upper bound seems to be 9 hours, >>> the combined run times of the nscd processe, >>> some time during the night when the computers >>> were totally quiet. The lower bound based on >>> the run times of the smbd processes is more >>> like half an hour ago. >>> >>> This is the fourth out of 5 times that the same user, >>> "robf", is involved as the effective UID of the smbd process. >>> The other one time was root's own smbd. >>> >>> Jeremy, can I provide more information? >> >> I had a similiar Problem , and a loglevel of 4 shows , >> that samba was trying to look up a user nobody and a >> user Administrator, all the time. >> If I killed nscd the load of the ldap server becomes high... >> >> I added these user to my
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
>>#5 0x081298fd in get_memberuids () >>#6 0x08129b09 in _samr_query_groupmem () >>#7 0x081215d1 in api_samr_query_groupmem () >>#8 0x081358b2 in api_rpcTNP () >>#9 0x08135632 in api_pipe_request () >>#10 0x0812fc10 in process_request_pdu () >>#11 0x0812fdec in process_complete_pdu () >>#12 0x08130069 in process_incoming_data () >>#13 0x08130220 in write_to_internal_pipe () >>#14 0x081301a4 in write_to_pipe () >>#15 0x080883e0 in api_fd_reply () >>#16 0x080885b9 in named_pipe () >>#17 0x080891bc in reply_trans () >>#18 0x080c80e0 in switch_message () >>#19 0x080c8172 in construct_reply () >>#20 0x080c8491 in process_smb () >>#21 0x080c9004 in smbd_process () >>#22 0x081f812e in main () >>#23 0x402268ae in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 > > get_memberuids is expanding out the list of users in a group. Can you > tell me what the group membership matrix looks like for this user ? He belongs to 5 groups, with 53, 14, 7, 21 and 128 members. Most users belong to 3-4 project groups, 1-2 interest groups plus users(== "Domain Users"). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
>> the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work fine >> except that from time to time but at least a couple >> of times a day one or more smbd processes start >> running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes >> then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% >> users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. >> >> I'm sure that each such process is just idling, >> but why does it engage so much nscd processing? >> >> As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) >> the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 >> no perceptible CPU%. >> >> Does anyone know what's happening? >> > What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to > a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ? > Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole? OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow). >>> A pot watched never boils. >>> But as soon as it happens again, I'll consult >>> strace and gdb to see how and why it happens. >>> >> >> It does, when you stop watching. >> I was away yesterday and what do I see >> this morning: >> >>top - 09:55:35 up 6 days, 17:28, 6 users, load average: 3.59, 3.82, 3.15 >>Tasks: 182 total, 3 running, 179 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie >>Cpu(s): 21.6% user, 78.4% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle >>Mem: 2060704k total, 2004324k used,56380k free, 185272k buffers >>Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1068752k cached >> >> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command >>12808 robf 25 0 2996 2596 2244 R 23.6 0.1 4:46.98 smbd >>12741 robf 22 0 3028 2628 2280 R 20.6 0.1 5:44.55 smbd >> 2354 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 15.3 0.0 150:31.23 nscd >> 2356 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 14.9 0.0 150:35.87 nscd >> 2352 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 9.0 0.0 151:14.08 nscd >> 2353 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:39.89 nscd >> 2355 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:31.82 nscd >> 2350 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 3.7 0.0 150:49.78 nscd >> >> I attached both of the smbd processes to gdb and >> backtrace was always: >> >>#0 0x402e5328 in read () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>#1 0x40343b90 in __DTOR_END__ () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>#2 0x4031d58b in __nscd_getpwnam_r () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>#3 0x402c130d in getpwnam_r@@GLIBC_2.1.2 () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>#4 0x402c0e6f in getpwnam () from /lib/libc.so.6 >>#5 0x081298fd in get_memberuids () >>#6 0x08129b09 in _samr_query_groupmem () >>#7 0x081215d1 in api_samr_query_groupmem () >>#8 0x081358b2 in api_rpcTNP () >>#9 0x08135632 in api_pipe_request () >>#10 0x0812fc10 in process_request_pdu () >>#11 0x0812fdec in process_complete_pdu () >>#12 0x08130069 in process_incoming_data () >>#13 0x08130220 in write_to_internal_pipe () >>#14 0x081301a4 in write_to_pipe () >>#15 0x080883e0 in api_fd_reply () >>#16 0x080885b9 in named_pipe () >>#17 0x080891bc in reply_trans () >>#18 0x080c80e0 in switch_message () >>#19 0x080c8172 in construct_reply () >>#20 0x080c8491 in process_smb () >>#21 0x080c9004 in smbd_process () >>#22 0x081f812e in main () >>#23 0x402268ae in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 >> >> After killing both smbd processes with -9 the top soon >> stabilizes at: >> >>top - 10:12:01 up 6 days, 17:45, 6 users, load average: 0.03, 0.19, 1.17 >>Tasks: 175 total, 2 running, 173 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie >>Cpu(s): 0.0% user, 0.7% system, 0.0% nice, 99.3% idle >>Mem: 2060704k total, 2034272k used,26432k free, 185272k buffers >>Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1100020k cached >> >> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ Command >>15182 root 15 0 956 956 700 R 0.3 0.0 0:03.67 top >> >> Unfortunately I didn't trace the nscd processes. >> What a shame! I'll do it next time. >> >> Nobody complained yet about reduced performance. >> >> It's hard to tell when this behaviour started. >> The upper bound seems to be 9 hours, >> the combined run times of the nscd processe, >> some time during the night when the computers >> were totally quiet. The lower bound based on >> the run times of the smbd processes is more >> like half an hour ago. >> >> This is the fourth out of 5 times that the same user, >> "robf", is involved as the effective UID of the smbd process. >> The other one time was root's own smbd. >> >> Jeremy, can I provide more information? > > I had a similiar Problem , and a loglevel of 4 shows , > that samba was trying to look up a user nobody and a > user Administrator, all the time. > If I killed nscd the load of the ldap server becomes high... > > I added these user to my ldap backend, and the problem disappears. It's a valuable pointer but I'm not sure it really applies here, Han
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work fine except that from time to time but at least a couple of times a day one or more smbd processes start running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. I'm sure that each such process is just idling, but why does it engage so much nscd processing? As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 no perceptible CPU%. Does anyone know what's happening? >>> >>> What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to >>> a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ? >> >> Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole? >> OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow). > > A pot watched never boils. > But as soon as it happens again, I'll consult > strace and gdb to see how and why it happens. It does, when you stop watching. I was away yesterday and what do I see this morning: top - 09:55:35 up 6 days, 17:28, 6 users, load average: 3.59, 3.82, 3.15 Tasks: 182 total, 3 running, 179 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 21.6% user, 78.4% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle Mem: 2060704k total, 2004324k used,56380k free, 185272k buffers Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1068752k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command 12808 robf 25 0 2996 2596 2244 R 23.6 0.1 4:46.98 smbd 12741 robf 22 0 3028 2628 2280 R 20.6 0.1 5:44.55 smbd 2354 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 15.3 0.0 150:31.23 nscd 2356 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 14.9 0.0 150:35.87 nscd 2352 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 9.0 0.0 151:14.08 nscd 2353 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:39.89 nscd 2355 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 6.3 0.0 150:31.82 nscd 2350 root 15 0 724 716 536 S 3.7 0.0 150:49.78 nscd I attached both of the smbd processes to gdb and backtrace was always: #0 0x402e5328 in read () from /lib/libc.so.6 #1 0x40343b90 in __DTOR_END__ () from /lib/libc.so.6 #2 0x4031d58b in __nscd_getpwnam_r () from /lib/libc.so.6 #3 0x402c130d in getpwnam_r@@GLIBC_2.1.2 () from /lib/libc.so.6 #4 0x402c0e6f in getpwnam () from /lib/libc.so.6 #5 0x081298fd in get_memberuids () #6 0x08129b09 in _samr_query_groupmem () #7 0x081215d1 in api_samr_query_groupmem () #8 0x081358b2 in api_rpcTNP () #9 0x08135632 in api_pipe_request () #10 0x0812fc10 in process_request_pdu () #11 0x0812fdec in process_complete_pdu () #12 0x08130069 in process_incoming_data () #13 0x08130220 in write_to_internal_pipe () #14 0x081301a4 in write_to_pipe () #15 0x080883e0 in api_fd_reply () #16 0x080885b9 in named_pipe () #17 0x080891bc in reply_trans () #18 0x080c80e0 in switch_message () #19 0x080c8172 in construct_reply () #20 0x080c8491 in process_smb () #21 0x080c9004 in smbd_process () #22 0x081f812e in main () #23 0x402268ae in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 After killing both smbd processes with -9 the top soon stabilizes at: top - 10:12:01 up 6 days, 17:45, 6 users, load average: 0.03, 0.19, 1.17 Tasks: 175 total, 2 running, 173 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0% user, 0.7% system, 0.0% nice, 99.3% idle Mem: 2060704k total, 2034272k used,26432k free, 185272k buffers Swap: 2402296k total, 5236k used, 2397060k free, 1100020k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+Command 15182 root 15 0 956 956 700 R 0.3 0.0 0:03.67 top Unfortunately I didn't trace the nscd processes. What a shame! I'll do it next time. Nobody complained yet about reduced performance. It's hard to tell when this behaviour started. The upper bound seems to be 9 hours, the combined run times of the nscd processe, some time during the night when the computers were totally quiet. The lower bound based on the run times of the smbd processes is more like half an hour ago. This is the fourth out of 5 times that the same user, "robf", is involved as the effective UID of the smbd process. The other one time was root's own smbd. Jeremy, can I provide more information? Cheers, Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
>>> the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work find >>> except that from time to time but at least a couple >>> of times a day one or more smbd processes start >>> running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes >>> then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% >>> users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. >>> >>> I'm sure that each such process is just idling, >>> but why does it engage so much nscd processing? >>> >>> As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) >>> the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 >>> no perceptible CPU%. >>> >>> Does anyone know what's happening? >> >> What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to >> a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ? > > Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole? > OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow). A pot watched never boils. But as soon as it happens again, I'll consult strace and gdb to see how and why it happens. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
> > the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work find > > except that from time to time but at least a couple > > of times a day one or more smbd processes start > > running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes > > then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% > > users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. > > > > I'm sure that each such process is just idling, > > but why does it engage so much nscd processing? > > > > As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) > > the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 > > no perceptible CPU%. > > > > Does anyone know what's happening? > > What does strace say ? Can you attach with gdb to > a CPU bound process and give a backtrace ? Ah backtrace, to see the steps to the black hole? OK. Will do, sooen as I get back to office (tomorrow). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load > 4
Hi Everyone, the new 3.0.4 Samba installation seems to work find except that from time to time but at least a couple of times a day one or more smbd processes start running at 20%-40% CPU each and 6 nscd processes then share the remaining CPU power. System 70%-80% users the rest 20%-30%. Load rises fast to over 4. I'm sure that each such process is just idling, but why does it engage so much nscd processing? As soon as I kill the excessive smbd process(es) the situation drops to normal, i.e. load < 0,1 no perceptible CPU%. Does anyone know what's happening? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Frustrated...Samba on linux w/xfs SLOW problem
- Original Message - From: "Dragan Krnic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:34:38 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Frustrated...Samba on linux w/xfs SLOW problem > |>> it starts out at a decent speed for a second, then slows and slows > |>> and eventually stops. I then get the message "The specified > |>> network name is no longer available." > |> > |> Are you getting a lot of collisions when this happens? This sounds > |> suspiciously like a network problem, maybe mismatched duplex settings. > |> > |> Try FTPing or SCPing a file to the server from your Windows machine. If > |> that transfer is affected as well, it's a network problem, not a Samba > |> problem. > | > | I had tried scping and that does work fine. > | > | I tried the following test. > | I created a new ext2 file system on the computer, > | made it a samba share, and turned off all other > | samba shares except the ext2 one. I then wrote > | a 35M file from my windows machine to the linux > | server. It worked like it used to. > | > | This seems to prove to me that > | a) there is no network problem, > | b) samba is working correctly, > | c) there is DEFINATELY an issue with XFS and samba. > | From what I've read in some other places, > | it appears there is also an issue with ReiserFS and samba. > | > | What is it with samba that it only appears to like ext2/3 fs's? > | Is *ANYONE* using XFS with samba and having it work > | at a normal rate of speed when writing to it? > | > | Before anyone asks, I also did try mounting a drive > | from my windows machine via smbclient and copy > | a file on the linux box from the windows machine. > | That works fine, even to the xfs drives. > | > | It seems to me that there's got to be some option > | in the samba configuration that I just don't > | have correct. If someone is currently successfully > | using linux xfs w/samba, please, share your config! > > Your mileage may vary. There is nothing about samba to > prefer one fs over another. There are too many variables > involved, hardware, software, configuration. I had myself > some problems with ext3 and reiserfs in connection > with sata drivers in kernel 2.4.20. With the same > hardware and drivers xfs made a much better impression > in writing speed so I set up an array of 6 disks in > raid5 configuration and formatted it as xfs with an > external journal. And this is a copy transaction from > a client which is connected to the server with xfs > via a cheap Gigabit LAN Switch: > >U:\>dir >26.06.2004 20:02 . >18.06.2004 15:08 .. >25.12.2003 23:44 73.515.932 pmn90g.tarlist > 1 File(s) 73.515.932 Bytes > 1 Dir(s), 347.053.490.176 Bytes free >U:\>timethis copy pmn90g.tarlist C:\Temp\pmn90g >TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:01.601 >U:\>timethis copy C:\Temp\pmn90g >TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:01.892 > > Which means 46 MB/s from the server to the local > file and 39 MB/s from the local file back to server. > Not too bad for an xfs. Nothing special in smb.conf. > > I'm not convinced that there is a problem between > Samba and xfs. As I mentioned in a letter yesterday > some problems go away after a reboot. If you have > added a disk to format as ext2 then you have also > rebooted your system. If there were any problems > with WINS resolution due to stale cached entries > they might be gone after reboot. I don't say that > there can absolutely be no problems between samba > and xfs, only that it is not very likely. It is > difficult to see what's wrong with your setup. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Frustrated...Samba on linux w/xfs SLOW problem
|>> it starts out at a decent speed for a second, then slows and slows |>> and eventually stops. I then get the message "The specified |>> network name is no longer available." |> |> Are you getting a lot of collisions when this happens? This sounds |> suspiciously like a network problem, maybe mismatched duplex settings. |> |> Try FTPing or SCPing a file to the server from your Windows machine. If |> that transfer is affected as well, it's a network problem, not a Samba |> problem. | | I had tried scping and that does work fine. | | I tried the following test. | I created a new ext2 file system on the computer, | made it a samba share, and turned off all other | samba shares except the ext2 one. I then wrote | a 35M file from my windows machine to the linux | server. It worked like it used to. | | This seems to prove to me that | a) there is no network problem, | b) samba is working correctly, | c) there is DEFINATELY an issue with XFS and samba. | From what I've read in some other places, | it appears there is also an issue with ReiserFS and samba. | | What is it with samba that it only appears to like ext2/3 fs's? | Is *ANYONE* using XFS with samba and having it work | at a normal rate of speed when writing to it? | | Before anyone asks, I also did try mounting a drive | from my windows machine via smbclient and copy | a file on the linux box from the windows machine. | That works fine, even to the xfs drives. | | It seems to me that there's got to be some option | in the samba configuration that I just don't | have correct. If someone is currently successfully | using linux xfs w/samba, please, share your config! Your mileage may vary. There is nothing about samba to prefer one fs over another. There are too many variables involved, hardware, software, configuration. I had myself some problems with ext3 and reiserfs in connection with sata drivers in kernel 2.4.20. With the same hardware and drivers xfs made a much better impression in writing speed so I set up an array of 6 disks in raid5 configuration and formatted it as xfs with an external journal. And this is a copy transaction from a client which is connected to the server with xfs via a cheap Gigabit LAN Switch: U:\>dir 26.06.2004 20:02 . 18.06.2004 15:08 .. 25.12.2003 23:44 73.515.932 pmn90g.tarlist 1 File(s) 73.515.932 Bytes 1 Dir(s), 347.053.490.176 Bytes free U:\>timethis copy pmn90g.tarlist C:\Temp\pmn90g TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:01.601 U:\>timethis copy C:\Temp\pmn90g TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:01.892 Which means 46 MB/s from the server to the local file and 39 MB/s from the local file back to server. Not too bad for an xfs. Nothing special in smb.conf. I'm not convinced that there is a problem between Samba and xfs. As I mentioned in a letter yesterday some problems go away after a reboot. If you have added a disk to format as ext2 then you have also rebooted your system. If there were any problems with WINS resolution due to stale cached entries they might be gone after reboot. I don't say that there can absolutely be no problems between samba and xfs, only that it is not very likely. It is difficult to see what's wrong with your setup. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: specified network name is no longer available
That was a weird phenomenon! It looked so as if samba process dies before it can reply to an "NT Create AndX" request except there was no corpse anywhere. Volker wouldn't believe me I've sent him all the logs that were there. He was looking for a core dump. A "reboot tut gut" as the Germans say. After a new start the problem disappeared. Probably a bad case of stale cache. The nsc daemon perhaps? I'm not sure this recipee solves all such problems. Probably not. But the point seems to be that either there is an internal problem (samba panic) or a bug is eating up your network packets. Cheers > Jordan Coleman, Murray Taylor, David Kennel, > Frederic Corne and Stephen Jones all wrote > about the problem of a specified network > intermittently reported "no longer available" > when writing to a file. > > It's the same problem which I complained > about on April 7. I then assumed it had to > do with the presence of a w2k3 server in > the domain. The problem disappeared after > I removed the w2k3 and cleaned up the TDB's. > > On May 2 Jerry (Carter) said that Volker > (Lendecke) fixed that problem in 3.0.3. > > For many different reasons I've delayed > updating Samba until now (since the problem > seemed to disappear as I said). I've installed > Samba 3.0.4-SerNet-SuSE yesterday and have > that problem again. It affects only a share > on a member server (same hardware/software > as the PDC). Storing or copying a file into > a dir on that server causes the error > "Specified network name no longer available" > although one sees that a 0-length file has > been created. Trying to delete that file > brings the same message, but the file is > actually deleted. > > Again I've run many debug sessions but there > simply isn't anything there which would > indicate that something is wrong. > > The problem is really critical because the > said member server is part of a production > environment. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] specified network name is no longer available
Hi Volker, Jordan Coleman, Murray Taylor, David Kennel, Frederic Corne and Stephen Jones all wrote about the problem of a specified network intermittently reported "no longer available" when writing to a file. It's the same problem which I complained about on April 7. I then assumed it had to do with the presence of a w2k3 server in the domain. The problem disappeared after I removed the w2k3 and cleaned up the TDB's. On May 2 Jerry (Carter) said that Volker (Lendecke) fixed that problem in 3.0.3. For many different reasons I've delayed updating Samba until now (since the problem seemed to disappear as I said). I've installed Samba 3.0.4-SerNet-SuSE yesterday and have that problem again. It affects only a share on a member server (same hardware/software as the PDC). Storing or copying a file into a dir on that server causes the error "Specified network name no longer available" although one sees that a 0-length file has been created. Trying to delete that file brings the same message, but the file is actually deleted. Again I've run many debug sessions but there simply isn't anything there which would indicate that something is wrong. The problem is really critical because the said member server is part of a production environment. I would very much appreciate some help. Cheers Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba quotas
>> > I was never able to use the quota functions of samba. I use >> > Suse 8.2 with Samba 3.0.3 and XFS. Even the latest samba >> > version doesn't recognize quotas correctly. For me quota >> > code is broken since beginning in samba. >> >> I didn't know it was broken. What's broken? It works fine >> for me. > > I don't know if quotas are broken in general but I was never > able to get them work. I tried both compile options, > --with-quotas and --with-sys-quotas One's own rebuilds are OK. But do use SuSE's spec file because it includes most anything you could want in your samba package. Like acls and quotas for example. Even if you want something very special it's easier to configure with the spec file. >> I don't limit users. I limit projects (groups). > > I only use user quotas. > > Samba take care of quota restrictions. Users can't write more > data than allowed by quotas. But clients don't show used space > and free space correctly. It shows complete disk usage and > complete free space instead of space used by user and max. > space allowed by quotas So that's the rub. Is that how an MS Server would behave? It would show the capacity available to you as individual quotee? If it does, then there should be a smooth way to reproduce such behaviour for those who expect it, even if I don't personally think it makes much sense. I mean, free disk space is disk space not yet wasted on live files and available quota space is, well, available quota space. I would expect another mechanism to show me that value, not disk free. I'm not sure that samba is meant to show available quota space as disk free. The option "dfree command" sounds rather like it is provided as a fix for other possible problems but it's perfectly legitimate to tweak it in your sense. >> What did you think was wrong with quotas in samba? > > Thats the reason I've written it seems broken for > me and not in general. I don't know why it's exactly > not working. > > I don't know why they don't work for me. > I use Suse 8.2 standard installtion with all updates. > filesystem is XFS. > Samba is 3.0.3, self compiled. > Quotas are working fine but not in samba. Hold on there. What do you mean by the last sentence? Is it the disk free value erroneously showing total disk capacity minus occupancy instead of what you would expect from an MS server, or is it that quotas are not enforced by samba so that you can allocate more than you should be able to? > I've atached quota relevant parts of config.log. > I would be glad if you find an error in my configuration. I might come back to that log, after we make clear what exactly the problem is. You probably mean to say that samba handling of quota is broken because it doesn't behave the way you expect it to regarding the display of free space. I can't say for sure without MUCH more burrowing through the code but I guess that it's not implemented that way. You found and implemented an exemplary fix for it. Thanks for sharing it with the rest of us. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba quotas
>> Hi guys, we need to update our samba service from 2.2.8a
>> to samba 3.0.x (so that we can upgrade our AD from Win2k
>> to Win2k3). The problem I am having is with the quotas.
>
> I was never able to use the quota functions of samba. I use
> Suse 8.2 with Samba 3.0.3 and XFS. Even the latest samba
> version doesn't recognize quotas correctly. For me quota
> code is broken since beginning in samba.
>
> To get them displayed I use a dirty hack.
> In smb.conf I've added the following line:
> dfree command = "/etc/script.sh %U"
>
> script.sh:
> #!/bin/sh
> used_space=`/usr/bin/quota -u $1 | tail -1 | awk '{print $2}'`
> quota_space=`/usr/bin/quota -u $1 | tail -1 | awk '{print $4}'`
> used_files=`/usr/bin/quota -u $1 | tail -1 | awk '{print $5}'`
> quota_files=`/usr/bin/quota -u $1 | tail -1 | awk '{print $7}'`
> if [ "$used_files" == "$quota_files" ];
> then used_space=$quota_space
> fi
> free_space=`expr $quota_space - $used_space`
> echo "$quota_space $free_space"
I didn't know it was broken. What's broken? It works fine
for me. I don't limit users. I limit projects (groups). Since
a user may be in different projects there wouldn't be a single
quota value or dfree number anyway. The important point is that
each group can only use up what's allocated to it. I display
quotas in a table on swat's status page like this:
Quotas
(See also: "What to do, if Quota is exceeded?")
Group?Used MBs SoftLimit HardLimit
TOTAL 525637 665000 86
CALCX70728 0 0
PM1 1 105741 9 11
PM3 67125 7 8
root 1985 0 0
users 2436 1 15000
Everyone can see how much of the quota is used up in all of
the groups he belongs to, root can see it all. The question
mark column numbers the days remaining until grace expires.
There's also a mail reminder to the project leader every day
with a size-sorted list of all infringing files.
By the way, I think your script is broken. Not only can you
spare 3 iterations of quota and awk but the 5th and 7th
columns ($5 and $7) of the quota output are "grace" and
"(#files-)quota" if a value exceeds the limit instead
of "files" and "limit", which is probably intended by you.
A more careful coding would be:
quota -u $1 | tail -1 | awk 'NF>7{$5=""} {print}' | \
read a used_space a quota_space used_files a quota_files a
But I digress. What did you think was wrong with quotas in samba?
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: specified network name no more available
>> I was stung by this bug yesterday myself and although >> there are numerous references to this error message >> I haven't seen any qualified resolution of the problem. >> .. >> ... Because I think someone >> from the Samba team should shed some light on the >> topic and explain under what circumstances this >> pathological behavious can be expected. > > I think Volker fixed this post 3.0.3 (see the latest > SVN SAMBA_3_0 tree). Thanks Jerry. Awfully nice of you to let me know that it was fixed in 303. There was no response to my posting but I didn't want to pester you on this assuming it is not a very popular problem. Nice that it has been resolved. Volker normally informs us when a package is ready. I look up his site from time to time but his mail is always first post so to say. I'll install it on my SuSE 9.1/64-bit as soon as he can bake it or else grab it myself. Cheers Dragan -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Good day!
> But I do have one request for help; is there a way in which I > can allow users connected to the Samba machine to change thier > Samba passwords via a web interface? Or probably a command in > which I can change it from Windows? > > Ctrl-Alt-Del, "Change Password" Is it asking to much to use "telnet" and execute "passwd" once the user is logged in with his old password ? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Samba 3 vs. Windows 2003
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Alexander Lazarevich wrote: > Samba guru's: > > Our Samba 3 network performance is half that of Windows 2003 > Server. I really want to stay with samba/unix, but half the > performance? I'm hoping someone can point me in the right > direction so we can keep using samba/unix. I'll try to give > as much detail without giving pages and pages of benchmark > numbers. If someone wants to see numbers, I'll send them: > > Fileserver is Dell PE2600, Dual Xeon 18GHz, 2GB memory, > Gig NIC. System is dual boot RHEL3-AS with an ext3 filesystem > and Windows 2003 Server with NTFS. The fileserving disk is a > SATA-SCSI RAID enclosure. Bonnie++ and iozone both show that > the RAID enclosure can do 80MB/sec writes and 40MB/sec reads > on the ext3 in linux. Benchmarks in windows 2003 are very > similar. Why it gets faster writes than read, I don't know, > and I don't care right now. What I'm worried about is our > samba network performance. I think you should be more worried about why you get these inferior & contradictory values. You are using some kind of hardware raid controller with a scsi plug to you system and it strikes me as an extremely poor design performance-wise. No wonder it performs so poorly. About 45 MB/s both ways are possible between winboxen and samba with G-NICs and good disks. I only have a bdc and 5 w2k/xp workstations on a low-cost NetGear 8-port G-switch (the other 50 or so clients connect through a fast-lan switch) but I do get about 35 MB/s to and from pcs and up to 60 MB/s between sambatistas. The ext3 file system has a problem with sata, which I've been chasing for months. In my case the writes made at most 71 MB/s but reads were just normal with an average of 260 MB/s, occasionally up to 310 MB/s, using a 6-drive software raid0 attached to a HighPoint RR1820. To summarize, you might be better off using xfs file system with that particular hardware setup. > Clients are Windows XP/2K/NT4 pro with all patches installed > and Gig NICs. All the clients can netperf to the server at > 60+MB/sec, some even faster. No collisions on the NICs, > nothing wrong with the network. There is a cisco Gig switch > inbetween the client and the server as well. > > Here is the bottom line: > > When the server is running samba 3, the clients get > 12-13MB/sec. > > When the server is running windows 2003, the clients get > 24-26MB/sec. > > Keep in mind the server hardware is exactly the same, the > only thing I change is the software. Windows 2003 beets up > Samba 3, hands down. On the other hand, Windows 2003 servers tend to boss it over everybody below their rank, so when you switch from w2k3 to samba your client might be wasting their time trying to talk ads to the now absent server. I'm not sure your numbers are relevant under these conditions. I don't know much about w2k3 but I always had weird performance problems if a w2k3 was anywhere near my samba domain. > However, all this testing is done by just drag and drop, and > looking at the clock to time it. Not the best way to do it, > but I don't know of another way now, suggestions welcome. > The difference is obvious and consistent: 500MB file in > samba 3 writes to disk in 42 seconds, but writes to windows > 2003 disk in 21 seconds. I can produce the same results on > all of our clients any time of the day. With sufficiently large test files your method might be accurate enough, but still it's better to use the program "timethis.exe" to measure the execution time of a program like this: timethis copy C:\a-big-file X:\a-share It can be downloaded from Microsoft for free but you need to underclick an eula. > I've tried changing the smb.conf socket options (TCP_NODELAY, > SO_SNDBUF, etc.) to 65523, 242xxx, whatever. /etc/init.d/smb > restart, then try again. No change in performance whatsoever. > Still 12-13MB/sec. I've also set other options in smb.conf, > such as xmit, write size, read size, but nothing seems to > change the fact that samba 3 can't do more than 12-13MB/sec. > > I've also searched the list, and found some people had success > in performance issues by changing the SO_SNDBUF, but they > didn't list any benchmark numbers. Maybe they were happy with > 12-13MB/sec, but I'm not, especially if something else can get > 25MB/sec. My socket options are "SO_KEEPALIVE IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY". -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] can't copy files into one's own read-only directory
Windows know a special kind of folder links which look very much like real folders but they're really a set of a small write-protected directory containing just 2 files: one is named "target.lnk", a usual link file with details about the target directory to which it points, and the other is a hidden system file (attributes "SH"), called "desktop.ini", with an id of a shellClass. You see this delicate structure only in a DOS box because Windows always displays the set as though it were a real directory. You can create one by simply dragging a directory from an Explorer window and dropping it onto the "Start" button. It then becomes an additional menu item just like "Progs", "Favourites" or "Settings" - it opens onto a view of the said drag-dropped directory. If your profile server is a Windows server, this drag-dropped thing will be saved in your profile and correctly restored on next login, be it on the same workstation or on another. But not if your server is Samba. Two years ago I had the problem that this kind of setup did not survive across logins because samba didn't copy the read-only attribute of such folders. A comment in source file "smbd/dosmode.c" said "We never make directories read only for the owner as under DOS a user can always create a file in a read-only directory". However by changing the next line so that it doesn't force the writeability for the owner I could build smbd that copied these contradictory objects (from the point of view of POSIX) correctly across logins. I moved my users yesterday from a Samba 2.2.8a to a 3.0.2a, rebuilt smbd with that little kludge and - nothing. It doesn't fix the problem anymore. If you've extended your profile with such a folder link, there'll always be an error message on logout saying it can't copy the file "target.lnk". When you login again that folder will be an empty folder. Is there a way around this problem short of ignoring it or, shudders, using a Windows server for profiles. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: specified network name no more available
I was stung by this bug yesterday myself and although there are numerous references to this error message I haven't seen any qualified resolution of the problem. Not that the following rant hopes to be such, but it's a good story. My setup is a stable 2.2.8a production domain and an experimental 3.0.2a-SuSE domain. The passwd backend is still smbpasswd. I wish there were a better openLDAP primer for Sambatistas but in view of the relative stability of the users landscape a simple copy from time to time was replication enough to keep things working smoothly even though not spectacularly pretty, until I added a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition as a member client in the 2.2.8a domain. Since then no operation requiring any writing, attribute setting or directory modifications in the 3.0.2a domain could be executed. Usually a long stall would precede the famous last words "...no more available". I still don't know exactly why it turned out that way but after removing (actually completely obliterating the said W2K3 for good measure) I deleted all those volatile TDB's on both servers and got a new lease on life after a reboot. Luckily I joined the W2K3 to the domain after-hours so nobody even noticed there was any problem. So why am I telling you this? Because I think someone from the Samba team should shed some light on the topic and explain under what circumstances this pathological behavious can be expected. I did quite a bit of debugging with Samba's log levels, ethereal and filemon.exe but hard as I tried to make any sense of the data there was never any indication that anything was our of ordinary. Samba maintains that everything is hunky-dorey, no problems there. Ethereal captures inconspicuous chatter on the wire but my W2K WS reaches for the tell-tale "chord.wav" accompaniment as soon as a close on the newly created file/dir terminates successfully. Sounds like Windoze clients get utterly confused when they just see a W2K3 idly standing by, not running the show. But this is just a wild guess. Can anyone tell us what is really going on? Cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Strange behaviour WinHP and 2.2.8a and inherit permissions
>> > ... I don't see anything wrong with it, although
>> > my working equivalent of your [Dokumente] looks a little
>> > different:
>> >
>> > [Dokumente]
>> >path = /daten/shares/dokumente
>> >read only = No
>> >map system = No
>> >inherit permissions = Yes
>> >security mask = 0777
>> >directory security mask = 0777
>> >oplocks = No
>> >
>>
>> Some more differences that would have been easier to pick
>> had you smb.conf been reduced to non-default essentials:
>>
>> [global]
>> ...
>> dos filemode = Yes
>> mangle case = Yes
>> character set = ISO8859-1
>> map system = Yes
>> map hidden = Yes
>> ...
>>
>> It doesn't strike me as possible cause but you can never
>> dismiss the possibility of side effects even in a well done
>> software suite like samba.
>
>[global]
> workgroup = ARBEITSGRUPPE
> server string = Samba Server
> encrypt passwords = Yes
> map to guest = Bad User
> time server = Yes
> unix extensions = Yes
> socket options = SO_KEEPALIVE IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY
> printcap name = CUPS
> os level = 2
> local master = No
> domain master = No
> printing = cups
> veto files = /*.eml/*.nws/riched20.dll/*.{*}/
>[homes]
> comment = Home Directories
> valid users = %S
> read only = No
> create mask = 0640
> directory mask = 0750
> browseable = No
>[print$]
> comment = Printer Drivers
> path = /var/lib/samba/drivers
> write list = @ntadmin root
> force group = ntadmin
> create mask = 0664
> directory mask = 0775
>[Dokumente]
> path = /daten/shares/dokumente
> read only = No
> inherit permissions = Yes
> oplocks = No
>
> Map system, security mask, directory security mask dont show
> because the values you have given are default values
Default for map system is "No". But since it is "Yes" in
[global], in order to make it compatible with some M$ dirty
tricks in user homes and profiles, it is only redefined "No"
in this share. Some side effects from first enabling and
then explicitely disabling might be what's missing. Or else
your smb.conf is basically the same as mine, in which case
you need to try to debug it.
There's also bug #51 which might be the cause of your problem
although it was defined in other terms. I had a problem that
excel sheets didn't open from paths containing German Umlauts.
Since I never checked if the bug persists without inheritance
it might be the same problem with different symptoms. There's
a bugfix for that in Samba's bugzilla here:
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51
> The only different option was oplocks but it did not make
> any difference.
>
> Perhaps I get a little time this evenig and try samba3 or
> going back to 2.2.6 wich worked fine.
That would be a pity and a security risk.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Strange behaviour WinHP and 2.2.8a and inherit permissions
> ... I don't see anything wrong with it, although > my working equivalent of your [Dokumente] looks a little > different: > > [Dokumente] >path = /daten/shares/dokumente >read only = No >map system = No >inherit permissions = Yes >security mask = 0777 >directory security mask = 0777 >oplocks = No > Some more differences that would have been easier to pick had you smb.conf been reduced to non-default essentials: [global] ... dos filemode = Yes mangle case = Yes character set = ISO8859-1 map system = Yes map hidden = Yes ... It doesn't strike me as possible cause but you can never dismiss the possibility of side effects even in a well done software suite like samba. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Strange behaviour WinHP and 2.2.8a and inherit permissions
Was that really your smb.conf or the long output of testparm? It's difficult to use. I suggest you should remove all items with default values. Other than that I don't see anything wrong with it, although my working equivalent of your [Dokumente] looks a little different: [Dokumente] path = /daten/shares/dokumente read only = No map system = No inherit permissions = Yes security mask = 0777 directory security mask = 0777 oplocks = No Try it out. If it doesn't work for you, then you'll need to bump the debugging level a little higher and try to figure out what actually happens when you try to execute a WinProg on this share with enabled permission inheritance. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: loading print driver question
> I am trying to add print drivers for a samba shared > printer to a Windows 2000 group - Everything up to > this step works - I am using Samba 3.0.1 > > rpcclient -d 100 -Uroot -c 'adddriver "Windows NT x86" \ > E323:LMAAE1DD.dll:\ > LMAAE1P1.PPD:LMAAE1DA.DLL:LMAAE1DA.HLP:NULL:RAW:\ > LMAA1B1.DLL,LMAAE1BJ.DLL,LMAAE1BT.DLL,LMAAE1DA.ALL,\ > LMAAE1ED.DLL,LMAAE1PI.EXE,LMAAE1TD.DLL,LMAAE1TE.DLL,\ > LMAAE1DA.CNT,LMAAE1DF.DLL,LMAAE1DL.DLL,LMAAE1PU.DLL,\ > LMAAE1SE.DLL,LMAAE1TF.DLL,LMAAE1TH.HLP,LMAAE1UZ.ZIP' SambaEnt > > The result I get is: > > result was WERR_ACCESS_DENIED > > In the log.smbd I get the following error: > >[2004/01/18 17:29:22, 0] printing/pcap.c:pcap_printer_fn(361) > Unable to open printcap file cups for read! > > I'm not sure whats causing this error. I have changed the > permissions on the /etc/printcap file to be wide open, and > that doesn't seem to work either. Can anyone shed some light > on where I might have messed up? There are too many single points of failure - correct spelling and ordering of parameters, existence of driver files at the right location, perms on the target model subdir etc. But all these can usually be precisely detected by using a proper debug level - of smbd, NOT of rpcclient. Jump the debug level with smbcontrol and then look in the client log file after the failure. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Strange behavior WinXP and 2.2.8a and inherit permissions
> I have a quite strange problem. > I have updated my Server with Suse 9.0 to Samba 2.2.8a. > From that moment on I couln'd run programms directly > from the share anymore. The WinXP Client says: "you > dont have the permission for this file." But I have > all permissions for it. This only occurs in that shares > where I have set "inherit permissions" to yes. When I > set it to "No" it works again. I can run programms from > the share. I tried it on two XP Clients with same > results. When I used a WinMe Client it worked all the > time. It looks for me a bit like a bug. For I have not > changed anything except updating samba to 2.2.8a Perhaps the group execute bit is interpreted as system attribute. Try "map system = No" and leave inheritance on. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba 2.2.8a PDC LDAP CTRL+ALT+DEL password change, not chaning Unix password
> I am running samba 2.2.8a with ldap PDC. From windows > machine If I change password by process CTL+ALT+DEL > key its changing only windows password. > > from command line smbldap-passwd.pl script changing > the both UNIX and samba password. > > any idea why its not changing UNIX password? Case sensitivity perhaps? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: High load average and client timeouts
> I am setting up a proof-of-concept backup server at my > office. The end idea is for a dozen or so of our ~200 > workstations to dump images (like PowerQuest > DeployCenter, not JPEG) to a 2Tb RAID5 at reasonable > speeds. Your backup program is a bit less general than a tar which I use, but perhaps you can make some analogy with my comments below and apply it to your case. Basically I think your problem is that continuous writing to an smb-share is rather fragile. If your backup problem allows you to output data to stdout, then you might attach it to an rsh or rexec filter with buffering software on the Linux side. Read my comment. > One nagging question is what would the "real" server's > performance be? We have spec'd dual Athlon MP 2200+ > CPUs, a 3ware 7506-12 controller with 12 200gb > Western Digital drives, and 4gb of RAM. (Whole thing > is $6,000!!) Thing is, I don't think the RAID would > be much faster (writing) than the existing IDE drive. > I'd hate to blow six grand and find out it doesn't > perform any better. I can speculate what a "real" server would do, but I've been doing something like that for a long time with a similar workstation, SuSE 8.2, P4/3G, 2GB RAM, 480 GB 4-way IDE stripe and never bothered to look at load numbers because it works so smoothly. 25 admin shares are being backed up simultaneously every workday but without affecting interactivity of remote sessions. The built-in Gbit NIC is using up all 100 Mbps that the switch passes on to it plus about 20 MB/s from a samba PDC via a Gbit link, so there is an aggregate max speed of about 32 MB/s. Never any aborts. The trick is probably in the little buffering filter (xt) between the backup tool and the disk. This is more efficient both because the reading part accepts incoming data without delay and because the writing part only writes data to disk once a high mark is reached so when it starts writing it flushes data in one big chunk, which reduces fragmentation. The downside is that I'm using 32 MB RAM per backup session, so you need more memory. The buffer size is settable to a multiple of 64 KB between 10 and (SHMMAX/64KB - 3). 512 works fine for me but less would probably work decently too. I use tar as backup tool. All shares are smbmount'd under /mnt so backing the data up is basically for share in $( /tars/$share ) & done Well, there's a little more for logging (2>/logs/$share) and incrementation (find . -mtime -o -ctime | tar -T -...) but I didn't want to clutter the simple example. The filter xt has optional arguments -i infile, -o outfile, -s KBchunk, -n numchunks, -t sleeptime. Defaults are stdin, stdout, 64 KB, 10, 1. I also use it to transfer backups to tape. It can read from the stripe at about 130 MB/s and the tape can accept about 80 MB/s, if no other I/O takes place, but combining the two reduces the speed to about 35 MB/s so that on average only about 50 MB/s are obtained. A "real" server not limited to 32-bit/33MHz PCI could probably do a little better. > System specs: > Linux 2.4.22 (custom) > Slackware 9.1 > Samba 3.0.1 > 2.2Ghz Intel Celeron > 60gb Maxtor 6Y060L0 on UltraATA/133 > 128mb RAM, 256mb swap > # Will try to add RAM next week > On-board Intel Pro/1000 (Gigabit) NIC -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate and smbmounted Win shares
>>>Now, that is strange. Setting the readonly attribute > > attrib +r filename > If you know how to use cmd.exe. If not use explorer, > right click, mark readonly. > > >>> would change this, but this may not be a solution for >>> your problem. Try to revoke the right to 'write extended >>> attributes' for everyone, > > Open security settings from a file, click the extended > button, edit and look up the list until you find > something similar. Mark deny. If you can't edit it > because it's all greyed out, it is an inherited right. > Create a new entry first or disable inheritance. > > >> Must be something in Win registry? > No. > If you don't know what user rights exist on a NTFS > file system you really should look it up. Sorry that > my mind reading capabilities suffer with distance. > > Keep in mind that names and settings are translated > from german and could have different names in an > english version of windows. > > And before you ask, yes, it is tested. That's great. It really works. Thanks, Holger. I answered before it dawned on me that you meant the "Write Extended Attributes" privilege in Advanced File Security Properties. Sorry. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Profile privelege problem
> ... > I used the latest and greatest SuSE 9.0 Professional... > I then installed all the latest patches via YaST. That > gives me a kernel of 2.4.21 (-144 in SuSE speak) and > Samba 2.2.8a > > I had the configuration backed up on another box, so I > used that as the base for Samba 2.2.8a. I have tried > chmod, chown of various directories, making profile > world readable, writeable, executeable, all to no avail. > have tried commenting out various lines as suggested by > other posts...also to no avail. > > W2K reports it can not find roaming profile, and then > also reports it can not find a local profile, and signs > the user (any user) on with a "temp" profile. All drive > mappings are available, just no profiles, recent lists, etc... > > Samba log is showing: api_samr_set_userinfo: Unable to > unmarshall SAMR_SET_Q_USERINFO > > bumping the samba log level, verifies that I am going after > the user profile and I am "dying" because of lack of > privelegesyet I can ssh into the box as a user and read > or touch or execute anything I want !? Must be something trivial, but whoever wants to help you will need your smb.conf to see how you set it up. I can suggest relevant options how I handle the profiles: [global] ... logon path = \\p90.p1.n.d.d\profiles\%U domain logons = Yes create mask = 0664 directory mask = 0775 ... [profiles] path = /local/profiles valid users = %U read only = No inherit permissions = No security mask = 0777 directory security mask = 0777 browseable = No csc policy = disable My Samba server is a PDC for the domain with wins and all. It runs SuSE 8.2 (kernel 2.4.20-86) but that shouldn't matter. The permissions on user profile directories are all "drwx--S--". All directories belong to individual users, group "users". If you can't recognize what your problem is, enclose smb.conf next time. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate and smbmounted Win shares
>> I wasn't clear enough perhaps. >Maybe. > >> original file. If NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate is set >> to 1 then the original file's LastAccessTime won't >> be updated after a DOS copy command, but it will if >> I use cp on an smbmounted volume. > > Now, that is strange. Setting the readonly attribute > would change this, but this may not be a solution for > your problem. Try to revoke the right to 'write extended > attributes' for everyone, that shouldn't interfere with > usual access, but stop the LastAccessUpdate. Sounds self-explanatory. Must be something in Win registry? I have to look it up. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate and smbmounted Win shares
> I remember there is a option called 'dos filetime resolution' > for visual c problems, maybe this helps you. This option was supposed to only fake the DOS FAT time resolution of 2s and there's another one which forces the faked 2s-resolution even when a Win client asks for 1s-resolution explicitly. On the other hand, smbmount not being part of Samba at all, I don't see how setting these options could affect what is happening outside of Samba, in the kernel. But thanks for the suggestion. I like out-of-box hints. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate and smbmounted Win shares
>> updated regardless of the setting of >> NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate. > > This disables the access update, means read access. > > If you cp this is write access, this will update the > change time and i don't think you can disable this. > > access and change update are 2 seperate fields. I wasn't clear enough perhaps. I'm talking about the original file. If NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate is set to 1 then the original file's LastAccessTime won't be updated after a DOS copy command, but it will if I use cp on an smbmounted volume. The destination file will of course have both LastAccessTime and CretionTime set to the current time. Like this: C:\Temp>dir /t:a a.xml 12.12.2003 18:02 168.346 a.xml C:\Temp>copy a.xml b.xml 1 Datei(en) kopiert. C:\Temp>dir /t:a a.xml b.xml 12.12.2003 18:02 168.346 a.xml 14.12.2003 15:59 168.346 b.xml C:\Temp>dir /t:c a.xml b.xml 02.01.1997 16:24 168.346 a.xml 14.12.2003 15:59 168.346 b.xml C:\Temp>dir /t:w a.xml b.xml 04.12.2003 11:24 168.346 a.xml 04.12.2003 11:24 168.346 b.xml -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate and smbmounted Win shares
Setting this dword to 1 in HKLM/CurrentControlSet/Control/FileSystem is supposed to suppress updates of a file's Access Time attribute when browsing but even read-only accesses with NotePad or plain copy leave no traces. However, if you cp or cat (or for that matter tar) a file on an smbmounted Win share, the Access Time is updated regardless of the setting of NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate. This produces an annoying warning message for users of MS VC++ Studio that the file they've been editing had been changed by another program and prompt them to reload it. Does anyone know how to work around this problem? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Problems with file date/time creation and modification
The dos filetime resolution should have made your server always return 2s-rounded times. The dos filetimes should have made it use the same 2s-rounded times even when the client asks the time with 1s resolution. Now the problem with 2s resolution only applies to FAT16 volumes. NTFS uses 1s resolution. So if you set both of those options to Yes even though your Win volume is NTFS, you'r looking for trouble. When you copy a file with creation time of 18:30:01 the Samba's OS will correctly copy it as 18:30:01 but since you said it should round the time to 2s resolution even when explicitely asked for 1s resolution, then it will say 18:30:00. What happens when you set both of those options to No? - Original Message - DATE: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:05:21 From: Raphael TAVERNIER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] So no solution?... It is not possible to syncronize "real" M$ files with samba share files At 12:52 12/12/2003, you wrote: > I have Time precision problem between linux samba shares > and M$ files I want to use my tux to save files from my > M$ PC's. Of course I want to do incrementals copy based > on modification date... > > I mount my samba shares from my Windows Boxs and use > tools on the micro$oft boxs. (Xcopy /D or SyncroniX ) > The problem is that the modification date on the samba > share and on de source file on the M$ local disk is > sometimes different by 1s (newer or older). > For example I create a file c:\mytest.txt the file > properties says Created modified at 18:30:01 > I xcopy it to my samba share window$ properties says > Created modified at 18:30:00 which is older! so when > I xcopy /D the file is copied again and again. > > I'm Running samba-2.2.7a-8.9.0 on Redhat 9.0 > My M$ boxs are both W2K and XP (on NTFS). > > I've searched a little around and set : > dos filetime resolution = yes 'for the dos 2s > resolution time... and : dos filetimes = yes > '...for Visual C++... > > But it didn't change anything. > Is it possible to syncronize these filetimes...? Probably not. I believe DOS/Windows packs the time in such a way that they have no notion of odd seconds times. All seconds are even. But that is normally no problem. _ Envie de discuter en "live" avec vos amis ? Télécharger MSN Messenger http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/m la 1ère messagerie instantanée de France oo Raphaël TAVERNIER Portable: 06 09 21 36 96 Home: 04 50 52 52 73 [EMAIL PROTECTED] oo -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Problems with file date/time creation and modification
> I have Time precision problem between linux samba shares > and M$ files I want to use my tux to save files from my > M$ PC's. Of course I want to do incrementals copy based > on modification date... > > I mount my samba shares from my Windows Boxs and use > tools on the micro$oft boxs. (Xcopy /D or SyncroniX ) > The problem is that the modification date on the samba > share and on de source file on the M$ local disk is > sometimes different by 1s (newer or older). > For example I create a file c:\mytest.txt the file > properties says Created modified at 18:30:01 > I xcopy it to my samba share window$ properties says > Created modified at 18:30:00 which is older! so when > I xcopy /D the file is copied again and again. > > I'm Running samba-2.2.7a-8.9.0 on Redhat 9.0 > My M$ boxs are both W2K and XP (on NTFS). > > I've searched a little around and set : > dos filetime resolution = yes 'for the dos 2s > resolution time... and : dos filetimes = yes > '...for Visual C++... > > But it didn't change anything. > Is it possible to syncronize these filetimes...? Probably not. I believe DOS/Windows packs the time in such a way that they have no notion of odd seconds times. All seconds are even. But that is normally no problem. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Backup from Linux onto Win2K-share
|> I have a Windows-2000-domain with ten W2K servers. One of the |> servers is my backup server which has a share for each of the |> other servers where they can put their database-backups. As |> well I have a Linux box running a database; it also has to put |> its database backup to a share (named above). |> |> A few words on my database: I'm running SAP DB 7.3. It has the |> option to backup the database either on a tape or on into a |> file. If using "file-backup" this file can be anywhere on the |> linux, either in the local file system or in NFS or in SAMBA. |> SAP DB does not care on that as long as it can use a mount. Can you give your SAP DB backup program name of a pipe file as destination? Then you can read from that pipe through a decent "rsh" or "rexec" from W2K. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Still trying to backup 66 GB from LINUX to W2K
Both "rexec.exe" and "rsh.exe" from W2K have the problem. However, the "rsh.exe" from Hummingbird's Exceed package works just fine. I copied it into my cygWin's /usr/bin directory and did cd /cygdrive/c/temp time rsh p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - SAS" | dd of=here.tar and the file is OK. It tars out all the files in SAS directory. Unfortunately cygWin's "ls -l" shows the file size modulo 2 GB, like this: -rw-rw-rw- 1 root mkpasswd 786464768 Nov 24 15:49 here.tar But W2K's dir sees the size correctly as: 24.11.2003 15:495.081.432.064 here.tar Note that the file is quite a bit smaller than the one obtained with W2K's "rexec.exe" and "rsh.exe" (21,043,160 bytes shorter), because there is no LF->CR/LF translation with Hummingbird's rsh.exe. |> But there's a little rub - the redirection on W2K side |> introduces a carriage-return character before each |> line-feed, like ftp in ascii mode. Sorry about that. |> Even the cygWin filter "dd" can't help it. |> |>>|% You may use "rexec" from W2K to remotely start a process on |>>|% a Linux box and then redirect the output to a file, like this: |>>|% |>>|% C:\Temp>rexec p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - pst" > here.tar |>>|% Name (p92.p.n.d.d:root): |>>|% Password (p92.p.n.d.d:root): |>>|% C:\Temp>dir here.tar |>>|% Medium in Drive C: No designation |>>|% Medium srl. no.: 582D-A5D8 |>>|% Directory C:\Temp |>>|% 20.11.2003 14:172.462.627.947 here.tar |>>|% 1 File(s)2.462.627.947 Bytes |>>|% 0 Directory 46.868.381.696 Bytes free |>>|% So it's bigger than 2 GB. |>>| |>>| Hi Dragan,can you please try to rexec a five (5) |>>| gigabyte file?I'm wondering what's happening then |>> |>>From Linux side: |>> p92:/local # du -sk SAS |>> 5041017 SAS |>> |>>From W2K Side: |>> C:\Temp>timethis rexec pmn92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - SAS">here.tar |>> TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:08:31.890 |>> |>> C:\Temp>dir here.tar |>> 24.11.2003 13:475.102.475.224 here.tar |>> |>> What did you expect? |>> Works also with "dd if=file" > here.tar to just copy |>> a single 5 GB file to W2K. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Still trying to backup 66 GB from LINUX to W2K
But there's a little rub - the redirection on W2K side introduces a carriage-return character before each line-feed, like ftp in ascii mode. Sorry about that. Even the cygWin filter "dd" can't help it. >|% You may use "rexec" from W2K to remotely start a process on >|% a Linux box and then redirect the output to a file, like this: >|% >|% C:\Temp>rexec p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - pst" > here.tar >|% Name (p92.p.n.d.d:root): >|% Password (p92.p.n.d.d:root): >|% C:\Temp>dir here.tar >|% Medium in Drive C: No designation >|% Medium srl. no.: 582D-A5D8 >|% Directory C:\Temp >|% 20.11.2003 14:172.462.627.947 here.tar >|% 1 File(s)2.462.627.947 Bytes >|% 0 Directory 46.868.381.696 Bytes free >|% So it's bigger than 2 GB. >| >| Hi Dragan,can you please try to rexec a five (5) >| gigabyte file?I'm wondering what's happening then > >From Linux side: > p92:/local # du -sk SAS > 5041017 SAS > >From W2K Side: > C:\Temp>timethis rexec pmn92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - SAS">here.tar > TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:08:31.890 > > C:\Temp>dir here.tar > 24.11.2003 13:475.102.475.224 here.tar > > What did you expect? > Works also with "dd if=file" > here.tar to just copy > a single 5 GB file to W2K. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Still trying to backup 66 GB from LINUX to W2K
|% You may use "rexec" from W2K to remotely start a process on |% a Linux box and then redirect the output to a file, like this: |% |% C:\Temp>rexec p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - pst" > here.tar |% Name (p92.p.n.d.d:root): |% Password (p92.p.n.d.d:root): |% C:\Temp>dir here.tar |% Medium in Drive C: No designation |% Medium srl. no.: 582D-A5D8 |% Directory C:\Temp |% 20.11.2003 14:172.462.627.947 here.tar |% 1 File(s)2.462.627.947 Bytes |% 0 Directory 46.868.381.696 Bytes free |% So it's bigger than 2 GB. | | Hi Dragan,can you please try to rexec a five (5) | gigabyte file?I'm wondering what's happening then >From Linux side: p92:/local # du -sk SAS 5041017 SAS >From W2K Side: C:\Temp>timethis rexec pmn92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - SAS">here.tar TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:08:31.890 C:\Temp>dir here.tar 24.11.2003 13:475.102.475.224 here.tar What did you expect? Works also with "dd if=file" > here.tar to just copy a single 5 GB file to W2K. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Still trying to backup 66 GB from LINUX to W2K
> I'm still having that problem that my samba cannot backup > more than 2 GB onto a Windows share (on a Win2K box) (see > messages earlier in this forum - I have to backup a 66 GB > file out of database). You may use "rexec" from W2K to remotely start a process on a Linux box and then redirect the output to a file, like this: C:\Temp>rexec p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - pst" > here.tar Name (p92.p.n.d.d:root): Password (p92.p.n.d.d:root): C:\Temp>dir here.tar Medium in Drive C: No designation Medium srl. no.: 582D-A5D8 Directory C:\Temp 20.11.2003 14:172.462.627.947 here.tar 1 File(s)2.462.627.947 Bytes 0 Directory 46.868.381.696 Bytes free So it's bigger than 2 GB. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Automatic printer driver installation - PLEASE URGENT RESPONS
>> Sorry to interrupt you guys, and I understand you are getting a >> lot of mail every day, but we having a big problems about to let >> Windows XP client automatic add printer driver from the Samba >> Server (2.2.8a), we can not find any documentations on the >> internet, > > Google turns up a lot of links: > > http... As Kurt said, you've got to read the docs, but assuming you have done your homework and you still have problems with samba printing, in 2.2.8a, there was a bug in utility rpcclient which is discussed and fixed as bug #82. You have to patch your samba software and rebuild it. Take a look at: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: rpcclient adddriver problems 2.2.8a and 3rc4
| The command: | | rpcclient -U jarboed -c 'adddriver \ | "Windows NT x86" "RICOH Aficio 700PS:\ | RINH7PS5.DLL:RICNH703.PPD:RINH7PSU.DLL:\ | RINH7PSU.HLP:NULL:RAW:RNH7kmUI.DLL,\ | RNH7PS.DLL,RNH7km.INI,RINH7PS5.NTF,\ | RNH7Help.HLP,TrackID.DLL,TIFmtA.DLL,\ | TIBase64.DLL,TISHMEM.DLL,TICMD.EXE"' LINPS1 | | fails on 2.2.8a and 3rc4 (substituting server name | appropriately in the above command). | ... | The 2.2.8a also seems to fail at the | spoolss_io_r_addprinterdriver part: rpc_api_pipe: | len left: 0 smbtrans read: 28 | 18 spoolss_io_r_addprinterdriver | 0018 status: WERR_BADFILE | | Would smb.conf or anything else be helpful? 2.2.8a | is running on RH 7.2 platform with the samba rpm | rebuilt from the samba provided SRPM. The 3rc4 is | running with default RH samba rpms for RH EL3 AS as | built by RedHat (samba, samba-client, samba-common, | etc). Any ideas? smb.conf won't help. Double-check the placement of different components of the 2nd string. Wrong sequence might be reponsible for both problems. I would also definitely avoid blank char in naming, so instead of "RICOH Aficio 700PS", I'd rather put "RICOH700PS". There was a little bug in 2.2.x releases which is fixed and discussed at the following URL: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82 but it shouldn't apply to your problem with 3rc4, because it was fixed for good in 3 and it has a little different diagnostic anyways, but once you've squashed the primary problem it may strike you at least in 2.2.8a, so take a look at it. Diabetics: Click here for a Free Glucose Meter from Access Diabetic. http://r.hotbot.com/r/lmt_ad/http://mocda4.com/1/c/563632/102938/302214/302214 This offer applies to U.S. Residents Only -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Problem uploading printer driver on 2.2.8a (FreeBSD 4.8)
It's a bug. Fortunately it can be fixed by applying a couple of patches described in https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82 and then rebuilding 2.2.8a. > I have an annoying problem. I have declared a > printer for which I want Samba to download drivers > onto the clients. So I have configured print$ share, > the printer itself (by BSD printing), then connect > the printer to my W2K client (SP3 with ALL RPC > updates applied, including today's one). And it > fails : > - on the windows side, I have a popup : unable to > install driver. Operation could > not be completed. > - on the samba side, I get an internal error : . Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: roaming profile
> I have followed the notes from Using Samba for > an XP client. However when I goto create the > profile I get permission denide. However, as > you see below, the permissions I'm using > on /etc/samba/profiles is 777 so that is a > little confusing. > ... > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/etc/samba# testparm /etc/samba/smb.conf That wasn't necessary, Aschley. It would have been better to just show us your smb.conf, not all the defaults that smbd would assume. But before a smart Alec quotes your whole posting all over again, here is what I think is wrong: > [global] > . > logon script = %U.bat > logon path = \\%L\etc\samba\profiles\%U > logon drive = > logon home = \\%N\%U > . > [homes] > comment = Home Directories > read only = No > browseable = No > > [netlogon] > comment = Network Logon Service > path = /etc/samba/netlogon > guest ok = Yes > share modes = No > > [profiles] > path = /etc/samba/profiles > read only = No > create mask = 0600 > directory mask = 0700 > browseable = No > csc policy = disable The profiles paths in [global] and in [profiles] are contradictory. The [profiles] path is OK if your profiles are on your samba server under /etc/samba/profiles. But the logon path in [global] should then be "\\%L\profiles\%U" because "profiles" is the share not "/etc/samba/profiles", which is just the path to it for samba to know what to export as share "profiles". The logon home is also ambiguous, unless your samba server is itself the NIS server. It would better be "\\%L\$U". > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/etc/samba# ls -al > total 68 > drwxr-xr-x 5 0/0 4096 Sep 5 22:57 . > drwxr-xr-x 42 0/0 4096 Sep 4 14:20 .. > drwxrwxrwx 2 0/0 4096 Aug 6 09:27 netlogon > drwx-- 2 0/0 4096 Aug 6 09:29 private > drwxrwxrwx 2 0/0 4096 Sep 5 20:53 profiles > -rw-r--r-- 1 0/0 7201 Sep 5 20:52 smb.conf > -rw-r--r-- 1 0/0 9044 Mar 16 07:52 smb.conf-sample > -rw-r--r-- 1 0/0 23858 Aug 17 15:59 smb.conf.bak > -rw-r--r-- 1 0/0 4096 Sep 5 22:57 typescript You don't really want 777 perms for netlogn and profiles, 775 is OK if you don't mind everyone being able to know what users there are, 771 is much better, because it prevents everyone else from even finding out what users there are and still everyone can get his roaming profiles if you set proper perms on the individual subdirectories. Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: Samba PDC + WinXP = problems fetching remote profiles
> More than one week of fighting -- and still no
> result. I'm stuck at the very same point. Right
> now i had to make the system work just any way
> -- at least like file server for window$ clients.
> But the problem with file downloading still
> persists. And i really have no idea of what i do
> wrong.
You still have the problem! So sorry.
I installed an XP yesterday. All I had to do was set
network properties and register the SignOrSeal
patch (WinXP_SignOrSeal.reg). I left the default
IEEE 802.1X EAP setting ("Smartcard or other...") and
didn't disable the Web client service either, just
to see what kind of problems other people have.
Well, I had no problem whatsoever. I can login in
and out in a couple of seconds. I can transfer the
Win2K-SP4 (137 MB) in both directions under 15 sec.
I don't know what your problem is but in your shoes
I would try from scratch, with a very uncomplicated
setup - just the server and a freshly installed client
connected via a crossed cable and build from there.
Chances are that something completely different is
your problem, but you need to find it out slowly
and systematically.
>>> Sounds like symptoms of activated Web Client
>>> service.
>> Maybe the point is about EAP -- i did not quite
> Still no help. I even tried to select each prorocol,
> deselect each of their checkboxes and then deselect
> IEEE 802.1x, as someone reported this may help -- no
> result.
I wonder what other problem in client network
configuration can be masked by switching EAP and
Web client off. I've seen the problem only on an
XP client, a laptop. It wasn't severe. Opening a
share or a shared subdirectory would stall for several
seconds although it takes no time on other clients.
When I disabled Web client and EAP those symptoms
were gone.
With my new XP box I also tried and disabled both
EAP and Web client. No difference. Same login and
transfer speed.
EAP and Web client obviously do not need to be a
problem on an otherwise correctly set up server
and clients communicating through decent wires and
switches.
I'm afraid no one can help you but you yourself.
Go slowly from simple to more complex. Be sure what
works and you'll find out what the problem was.
Perhaps you should first test how fast ftp client
works.
Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] RE: PDC + LDAP + W2K-SP4 Domain logon
> Anyway... I found the problem. (but NO SOLUTION!!) > > Just to summarize... > I had a win2k sp2 machine at home and win2k sp4 > machines on my work. I was unable to login my > samba-pdc (v3 rc2) with the workstations @ work, > but I was able to connect from my win2k sp2 > machine at home through a VPN connection. > > I now took that machine (w2k sp2 -machine from > home) to my office to test if it would also work > on the network instead of a vpn connection. and... > it didn't, it gave the same error as the other > machines. > > In tcpdump I saw the DNS query from > _ldap._tcp.dc._msdcs.. This annoyed me, > because my workstation from home on VPN didn't do > this. > > Then I came up with the plan to disable my DNS- > server in my network-settings on my w2k-machines. > Then I tried to log on to the domain and > voila... it worked. When I enable the DNS-server > again in my configuration I can't login to the > domain anymore. > > I read some things about Native and Mixed -mode > w2k's. I believe this is the whole problem. W2k's > are in Native mode looking for Active Directory > and Samba obviously... not... since it can't. You are getting closer. Let's verify your server's and clients' TCP/IP configuration. My server is also primary DNS and WINS server for my clients. That means "wins support=Yes" and there is a named running on the server and its IP address is topmost under both DNS and WINS tabs of the Advanced TCP/IP properties box. In addition to that "Enable NetBIOS via TCP/IP" radio button is set under WINS tab, and under DNS tab both the radio button "Append primary and connection- specific DNS suffixes" and the box "Append parent suffixes of the primary DNS suffix" are set/checked. The primary DNS suffix is what you enter in System's tab Network identity->Properties->Advanced in the field "Primary DNS-Suffix...". The checkbox "Change DNS-Suffix when changing Domain" is left unchecked. Works like a charm for all SPs of 2k and XP. Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
