[Samba] sendfile as true by default
Dear list, Is there a reason for not having use sendfile= true in default configuration for 3.6 or 4.0 ? Regards, Dragos -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] domain provision error
Did samba build with acl support ? On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Gregory Sloop gr...@sloop.net wrote: GK it's not only your file system supporting ACL's - also some GK devel packages must be around during the build. GK See https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_4/OS_Requirements GS Thanks, but I do have all the ACL packages etc, described in the reqs. GS [I followed, exactly, the Deb/Ubuntu instructions.] One more follow-up to this. I see there were some other file-system reqs [I initially didn't think that section applied to Ubuntu.] However, I went back and edited fstab as required, and did the ACL tests. All appears good. So I re-ran the domain provision again. Same failure. So, as far as I can tell, it's not an actual ACL problem. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba 3 master browser on two networks plus WINS
This seems more a routing issue to me than samba. Packets cannot move between different networks without a route. You need to define a static route between your networks and then it will work. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] File update detection
There are too many possible causes to tell with only these details. I would try inotify on the samba box to determine what is the process causing the change. If its the samba process that is doing the change I would look at the Windows box process list. Procmon might help you http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896645.aspx Regards, On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Dennis Verspuij - SpuyMore den...@spuymore.nl wrote: Hello, I run Samba 4.0.0-168.fc18.rc5.x86_64 on my Linux box. I use an editor on my Windows box to edit files on one of the Samba shares and that editor has a file update detection mechanism, polling every x seconds for changes to file modification timestamp. And around every 12 to 14 seconds it pops up the files have been changed while they aren't. Any idea what may cause this? Kind regards, Dennis Verspuij -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/**mailman/options/sambahttps://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba3 and Office 2010
Besides what Jeremy suggested I think it can be solved on the client side with: Word Options - Trust Center - Trust Center Settings - 1. Trusted locations: Check Allow trusted locations.. 2. Trusted documents: Check Allow documents on a network to be trusted 3. Protected view: Uncheck fist 2. These should do it. Ps: At point 1 you might need to define your network location though it should work since point 2. Dragos On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Jeremy Allison j...@samba.org wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:46:55AM +0400, Андрей Гребенников wrote: Hi there people! I'd like someone to help me with samba shares and Office 2010. Whe a user opens a file from a share, msword or excel tells him that the file was got from internet and if you like to edit it you should push the button allow. How could I solve the issue from samba side? It's almost certainly the alternate data stream with Internet Zone being required. Try using the streams_xattr module on the share. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba with pam_group.so: add group on log in
In order for all PAM management types to be used you need to disable encryption on both Samba server and client. Dragos On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Arokux B. aro...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am using pam_group.so to add some additional groups to the users. However, although Samba obeys pam restrictions, it obeys only session type of management. pam_group.so, however can be used only with auth. That's why if a user logs in through Samba it won't have a particular group added and so not enough permissions to work with a share. How else can I add a group to a user account on the fly just after Samba log in? Thanks Arokux -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Solaris 11 ZFS - acl_xattr still needed ?
Then POSIX ACLs are still the way to go for the moment, though ZFS ACL's seems pretty robust. Volker, may I ask what is the trend now: are people switching to ACEs now or still stick with POSIX ? Dragos On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Volker Lendecke volker.lende...@sernet.dewrote: On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 02:12:02PM +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote: Seems resonable, zfsacl stores the ACE's natively compared to acl_xattr that makes use of extended attributes. It seems that the big players (Oracle, IBM) made their own tools. Any idea of the strict mapping completeness among zfsacl and acl_xattr ? Closer than posix acls, but depending on your requirements still pretty bad for some aspects of ACLs. In particular inheritance based things are not covered properly, and chown operations have very different semantics. Volker -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kont...@sernet.de -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Solaris 11 ZFS - acl_xattr still needed ?
Thanks Jonathan, I missed that. So, zfsacl is provided by Oracle. Should I favor acl_xattr besides zfsacl ? Dragos On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Jonathan Buzzard jonat...@buzzard.me.ukwrote: On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 09:18 +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote: Dear list, Setup is: Solaris 11 ZFS + Samba 3.5.10 What is the recommended way nowadays of performing strict permissions mapping between Samba and Windows NT 6.1 ? And a more broader question: is it desirable ? As we know ZFS has native NFSv4 ACL's and this would mean that permissions applied on Windows side should have an exact match on the ZFS side. Is it acl_xattr module still needed ? Example: [samba] path=/export/home/samba writable=yes vfs objects=acl_xattr By the way: acl_xattr is production ready now if I am not mistaken ? I would imagine that you want to be using the vfs_zfsacl module if you are running on Solaris with ZFS. Note that NFSv4 ACL's don't exactly match Windows ACL's either, though they are a close match. JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk Fife, United Kingdom. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Solaris 11 ZFS - acl_xattr still needed ?
Seems resonable, zfsacl stores the ACE's natively compared to acl_xattr that makes use of extended attributes. It seems that the big players (Oracle, IBM) made their own tools. Any idea of the strict mapping completeness among zfsacl and acl_xattr ? Is samba4 any breakthrough regarding this issue ? Dragos On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Jonathan Buzzard jonat...@buzzard.me.ukwrote: On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 12:34 +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote: Thanks Jonathan, I missed that. So, zfsacl is provided by Oracle. I have no idea as I don't use Solaris Should I favor acl_xattr besides zfsacl ? I would have thought that zfsacl which stores the ACL's as native NFSv4 ACL's would be preferable. My personal experience is with vfs_gpfs and GPFS to store the Windows ACL's as native NFSv4 ACL's in GPFS. JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk Fife, United Kingdom. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] Solaris 11 ZFS - acl_xattr still needed ?
Dear list, Setup is: Solaris 11 ZFS + Samba 3.5.10 What is the recommended way nowadays of performing strict permissions mapping between Samba and Windows NT 6.1 ? And a more broader question: is it desirable ? As we know ZFS has native NFSv4 ACL's and this would mean that permissions applied on Windows side should have an exact match on the ZFS side. Is it acl_xattr module still needed ? Example: [samba] path=/export/home/samba writable=yes vfs objects=acl_xattr By the way: acl_xattr is production ready now if I am not mistaken ? Dragos -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
