Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
>Another patch from metze, towards his work on sam_ads. > >See mx-ldap.sf.net for his current progress. this is the wrong link! see http://mx-plugins.sf.net/ metze - Stefan "metze" Metzmacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Sun Oct 6 23:53:33 2002 > Author: idra > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv22288/include > > Modified Files: > rpc_samr.h rpc_secdes.h smb.h > Log Message: > > try to put every security descriptors related definitions in the same file. > also try to uniform names to a clean scheme. > > first part. Nice work! Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
Tim look at include/rpc_secdesc.h here I made a more generic include file, maybe we can smoothly mode to these defines ... Simo. On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 00:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Mon Oct 14 22:57:59 2002 > Author: tpot > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv11875 > > Modified Files: > smb.h > Log Message: > Tidyup of file specific access mask bits. > > Added directory specific access mask bits. > > > Revisions: > smb.h 1.459 => 1.460 > >http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/smb.h?r1=1.459&r2=1.460 -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 01:06:43AM +0200, Simo Sorce wrote: > Tim look at include/rpc_secdesc.h > > here I made a more generic include file, maybe we can smoothly mode to > these defines ... Yup - these guys would fit quite nicely there. Tim.
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > - Added another cached access check to the connection struct. We now >cache whether a user is a printer admin at connection time to avoid >making a potentially long access check at every printer rpc. Tim, This should be a check on the printer_access member of the printer handle. We only do the print_access_check on OpenPrinter(). cheers, jerry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/ iD8DBQE92F5OIR7qMdg1EfYRAsnKAKDUefA646tjIZxfqunMi3eOsUuL1ACgoPq8 nYU4WdqubDEdsP53XjYaRBE= =bmRz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Thu, 2003-01-16 at 05:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Wed Jan 15 18:57:39 2003 > Author: jerry > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv9747/include > > Modified Files: > Tag: SAMBA_3_0 > includes.h rpc_dce.h smb_macros.h > Log Message: > *lots of small merges form HEAD If you were going to start merging NTLMSSP changes across, then you need to add ntlmssp.h, otherwise this looks like you just missed it when merging includes.h/rpc_dce.h. I was going to merge those changes when I had them stable (not changing each night :-) > > Revisions: > includes.h1.262.2.12 => 1.262.2.13 > >http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/includes.h?r1=1.262.2.12&r2=1.262.2.13 > rpc_dce.h 1.22.2.3 => 1.22.2.4 > >http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/rpc_dce.h?r1=1.22.2.3&r2=1.22.2.4 > smb_macros.h 1.39.2.2 => 1.39.2.3 > >http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/smb_macros.h?r1=1.39.2.2&r2=1.39.2.3 -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Fri Jan 24 18:35:22 2003 > Author: sharpe > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv2429/include > > Modified Files: > config.h.in > Log Message: > > At the prompting, start to add infrastructure to detect the presence of > getdirentries. We would also detect getdents if present. This has some > rudimentary support already. Ooops, that should be "At the prompting of Corny Bondad from HP, ..." Regards - Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 21:45, Simo Sorce wrote: > Are you sure it wasn't on purpose? > is uint32 defined elsewhere? Yep, right below it. It's pretty clear that it was a typo. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 12:22:06PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > More signed/unsigned fixes (yes, I run with funny compiler options) and > make x_fwrite() match fwrite() in returning a size_t. Andrew, can you merge these fixes into 3.0 please. They look like good/safe fixes to have in production. Thanks, Jeremy (aka 3.0 janitor mode :-).
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 12:32:44AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Cleanup bogus initialisation in SID_NAME_USE enum. > > Added new sid type = 9 for "computer" from MSDN. Should this be merged to 3.0? Volker pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:49:31PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Date: Thu May 29 23:49:31 2003 > Author: jra > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18192/include Don't forget your janitorial duties. (-: > This gets us closer to W2k+ in what we return for file ACLs. Fix horribly > broken make_sec_desc() that screwed up the size when given a SD with no > owner or group (how did it get this bad... ?). It needs a good working over with a testsuite. I ran in to all sorts of horrible messes when trying to write a client side setprinter level 3 for the python wrappers. Tim.
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 09:57:40AM +1000, Tim Potter wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:49:31PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Date: Thu May 29 23:49:31 2003 > > Author: jra > > > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18192/include > > Don't forget your janitorial duties. (-: Bollocks to HEAD. The patch doesn't even apply. There are missing files and the parse_XX code is different. HEAD is DEAD. I'm waiting for it to get replaced. If you want it up to date there should be a wholesale 3.0 -> HEAD replacement. Jeremy.
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
Why these patches are applied to SAMBA_3_0 only? Can we keep the 2 branches in sync? Simo. On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 21:08, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: > Date: Thu May 29 19:08:40 2003 > Author: jelmer > > Update of /home/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14198/include > > Modified Files: > Tag: SAMBA_3_0 > idmap.h > Log Message: > Add smb_register_idmap(). Based on a patch from metze > > > Revisions: > idmap.h 1.6.2.2 => 1.6.2.3 > > http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/idmap.h?r1=1.6.2.2&r2=1.6.2.3 -- Simo Sorce- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Samba Team- http://www.samba.org Italian Site - http://samba.xsec.it
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 02:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 09:57:40AM +1000, Tim Potter wrote: > > On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:49:31PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Date: Thu May 29 23:49:31 2003 > > > Author: jra > > > > > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > > > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18192/include > > > > Don't forget your janitorial duties. (-: > > Bollocks to HEAD. The patch doesn't even apply. There are > missing files and the parse_XX code is different. > > HEAD is DEAD. I'm waiting for it to get replaced. Well when tridge will merge his work, shouldn't we have HEAD in sync with SAMBA_3_0 ?? Should we make him commit to an old bracnh with unfixed bugs, and have regressions later on? > If you > want it up to date there should be a wholesale 3.0 -> HEAD > replacement. Please do so if it is the only way. Simo. -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano mobile: +39 329 328 7702 tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 09:42:11AM +0200, Simo wrote about 'Re: CVS update: samba/source/include': > Why these patches are applied to SAMBA_3_0 only? > Can we keep the 2 branches in sync? I usually apply my patches to both branches, but the problem is that they are currently out of sync. The patch didn't apply to HEAD cleanly and I didn't put any effort into solving it since HEAD = DEAD... Jelmer > On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 21:08, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: > > Date: Thu May 29 19:08:40 2003 > > Author: jelmer > > Update of /home/cvs/samba/source/include > > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14198/include > > Modified Files: > > Tag: SAMBA_3_0 > > idmap.h > > Log Message: > > Add smb_register_idmap(). Based on a patch from metze > > Revisions: > > idmap.h 1.6.2.2 => 1.6.2.3 > > > > http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/include/idmap.h?r1=1.6.2.2&r2=1.6.2.3 > -- > Simo Sorce- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Samba Team- http://www.samba.org > Italian Site - http://samba.xsec.it -- Jelmer Vernooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://samba.org/~jelmer/ Last CVS commit: Thu May 29 22:01:38 2003 (11h 16m ago) Bugs in bugzilla: 19 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 09:10:32AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Sat May 31 09:10:32 2003 > Author: vlendec > > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv2267 > > Modified Files: > Tag: SAMBA_3_0 > rpc_secdes.h > Log Message: > Fix compile. Oops. Sorry. Jeremy.
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:41:48PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Prototype version of trust passwords moved to SAM/pdb. This is > backend-independent part ie. interface - does build and (it seems) > doesn't break anything else. Thanks! We *really* need that in 3_0 as well. Volker
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:40:20AM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:41:48PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Prototype version of trust passwords moved to SAM/pdb. This is > > backend-independent part ie. interface - does build and (it seems) > > doesn't break anything else. > > Thanks! We *really* need that in 3_0 as well. "Patience, Luke" ;-) I'd rather try it out with basic backends (tdb and smbpasswd, namely) in HEAD and then port it to 3_0. We don't want to have passdb backends broken in our production release, I guess. cheers, -- Rafal Szczesniak Samba Team member http://www.samba.org
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 08:05:00PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Date: Thu Mar 18 20:05:00 2004 > Author: jmcd > > Update of /home/cvs/samba/source/include > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17754/include > > Modified Files: > passdb.h smbldap.h > Log Message: > merge from 3.0...LDAP password lockout support Can you see any reason why this could not be written to utilise gencache ? As far as I can see there's actually no data that couldn't be represented with gencache entry. If so, I could port it. cheers, -- Rafal Szczesniak Samba Team member http://www.samba.org
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
> Can you see any reason why this could not be written to utilise gencache ? > As far as I can see there's actually no data that couldn't be represented > with gencache entry. If so, I could port it. Yes, the cache entries do not expire based on a timestamp, but rather a timestamp+current password policy setting. Also, it was a lot of undue converstion between strings and numbers, which increases potential for errors. Jim McDonough IBM Linux Technology Center Samba Team 6 Minuteman Drive Scarborough, ME 04074 USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (207) 885-5565 IBM tie-line: 776-9984
Re: CVS update: samba/source/include
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:40:50PM -0500, Jim McDonough wrote: > > > > > > Can you see any reason why this could not be written to utilise gencache > ? > > As far as I can see there's actually no data that couldn't be represented > > with gencache entry. If so, I could port it. > Yes, the cache entries do not expire based on a timestamp, but rather a > timestamp+current password policy setting. Of course and it's still doable. As caches based on gencache have their own specifics they're built on top of it. This mechanism provides a GENeric CACHE :) If you think it is better to leave logon caching with its own mechanism, I am still happy with that. I just thought I had written gencache with using it this way on mind. I'll take a look once more at the code and talk to you. cheers, -- Rafal Szczesniak Samba Team member http://www.samba.org
