Re: [Samba] Code? or Test Pattern?
Hi Volker. The response became late. Why is it necessary to use old Samba? Size? License? Yes, a license is a thing which must be GPLv2. Although modification is contained in the source code (source code of GPLv3) after 3.0x, it cannot use on the problem of a license. Kenji -- Kenji Ichinoseki (ichinos...@sei-networks.com) At 11/06/24 18:35, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 06:23:11PM +0900, Kenji Ichinoseki wrote: Again, I would highly recommend using a much later version of Samba than 3.0.37. Many, many fixes have been made, in particular for compatibility to more modern Windows releases. Since it is necessary to use surely old samba, it corresponds. # New samba will be used at a my house. :-p Why is it necessary to use old Samba? Size? License? Volker -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 G\x8B\xD5tingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG G\x8B\xD5tingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Code? or Test Pattern?
Hi Volker. Thank you for the response. I would like to investigate and correct various source codes. Thanks and best regards, Kenji. -- Kenji Ichinoseki (ichinos...@sei-networks.com) At 11/06/24 16:48, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:17:29AM +0900, Kenji Ichinoseki wrote: My name is Kenji Ichinoseki and I am in charge of a project at Sumitomo Electric Networks, Inc. Please give me cooperation by all means about the affair in the account of a title. Now, I included Samba 3.0.37 in the Linux system currently developed (us). And it is testing using smbtorture(samba3.5.8 source4) . Please be aware that Samba 3.0 is out of support for a while now. You might be much better off to go with a much more recent version of Samba. I think that I should perform sfinfo.mode_information.in.mode = 0;, before executing CHECK_CALL_PATH, but is this understanding a mistake? Or is it a mistake in a document? In this respect, code is always boss. So probably the document just has a bug. With best regards, Volker Lendecke -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 G\x8B\xD5tingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG G\x8B\xD5tingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Code? or Test Pattern?
Hi, Voller. The way to do this is to run smbtorture against Windows latest server edition to make sure that smbtorture succeeds. Then adapt the Samba server side to the behaviour smbtorture expects. Now, as a modification sample, it is corresponding by the method which got advice. Again, I would highly recommend using a much later version of Samba than 3.0.37. Many, many fixes have been made, in particular for compatibility to more modern Windows releases. Since it is necessary to use surely old samba, it corresponds. # New samba will be used at a my house. :-p Best regards, Kenji. -- Kenji Ichinoseki (ichinos...@sei-networks.com) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] Code? or Test Pattern?
My name is Kenji Ichinoseki and I am in charge of a project at Sumitomo Electric Networks, Inc. Please give me cooperation by all means about the affair in the account of a title. Now, I included Samba 3.0.37 in the Linux system currently developed (us). And it is testing using smbtorture(samba3.5.8 source4) . The point in question was found in our entry of this test. It has a question to implementation of smbtorture of MODE_INFORMATION which is an entry of a RAW-SFILEINFO test. http://samba.org/samba/devel/smbtorture-raw-functions.txt -- it is written to the 1114th line in this URL as follows. --- Request is made using the MODE_INFORMATION (1016) info level. File is referenced by NAME. Set file mode to 0. SMBTorture Output: None. Tests/Expectations: Server should respond with NT_STATUS_OK MODE_INFORMATION query response should show that the file mode is set to 0. Notes: Same test as above except the file is referenced by name. --- Please see source4/torture/raw/setfileinfo.c. In CHECK_CALL_PATH in the 409th line of a version 3.5.8, 2 is set up to mode. --- printf(test mode_information level\n); sfinfo.mode_information.in.mode = 2; CHECK_CALL_FNUM(MODE_INFORMATION, NT_STATUS_OK); CHECK_VALUE(MODE_INFORMATION, mode_information, mode, 2); CHECK_CALL_PATH(MODE_INFORMATION, NT_STATUS_OK); CHECK_VALUE(MODE_INFORMATION, mode_information, mode, 0); sfinfo.mode_information.in.mode = 1; --- This is the same also in version 3.5.9 and 4.0.0 alpha15. I think that I should perform sfinfo.mode_information.in.mode = 0;, before executing CHECK_CALL_PATH, but is this understanding a mistake? Or is it a mistake in a document? Kenji. -- Kenji Ichinoseki (ichinos...@sei-networks.com) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
