On 8 August 2013 01:11, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 17:58 +0100, Dominic Evans wrote:
>> So the new packages have now made it into experimental
>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/samba/news/20130806T230018Z.html
>>
>> However, it isn't obvious wh
On 5 August 2013 01:28, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 14:41 +0100, Dominic Evans wrote:
>> The debian package of samba4 is still sitting at 4.0.3 in
>> experimental. Please could someone (Andrew?) upload an updated package
>> now that we are up
On 5 August 2013 01:28, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 14:41 +0100, Dominic Evans wrote:
>> The debian package of samba4 is still sitting at 4.0.3 in
>> experimental. Please could someone (Andrew?) upload an updated package
>> now that we are up
The debian package of samba4 is still sitting at 4.0.3 in
experimental. Please could someone (Andrew?) upload an updated package
now that we are up to 4.0.7?
http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/samba4.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://li
On 22 February 2013 11:48, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> Indeed, if the domain originally came from windows, then
> upgradeprovision should NOT be run. Indeed, I would have hoped that the
> tool would detect this and would not attempt an upgrade, but clearly
> this fails.
Ah. It might be worth adding
Originally I had a Win 2003 DC. I added a samba 4.0.0 DC to the
domain, allow full replication to take place and then transferred all
the roles to the samba 4.0.0 dc. Finally I removed the Windows DC from
the domain.
Everything has been working well. Today I upgraded from samba 4.0.0 to
4.0.3 and
I was having some problems with certain entries in my internal DNS
server refusing to be updated via nsupdate. The updates would always
be rejected. After investigating further I noticed that this seemed to
correspond with dnsNode entries in the sam.ldb that didn't actually
contain a dnsRecord attr
In samba-tool, sysvolreset has options for either --use-ntvfs or
--use-s3fs to set the permissions appropriately
However, sysvolcheck does not have the same capability, and always
attempts to verify in s3 vfs.
Is this a known limitation in Samba 4.0.0 ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the
On 11 January 2013 05:02, Matthew Gear wrote:
> I am attempting to install an Exchange 2010 deployment for integrated UM
> testing.
> As I attempted to extend the schema of the SAMBA 4 AD (setup /ps), the
> setup program came back and reported the following:
>
> "The Domain Controller 'smb4.homela
Hi,
As per the Samba 4.0.0 release notes:
> Replication of DNS data from one AD server to another may not work.
> The DNS data used by the internal DNS server and bind9_dlz is stored
> in an application partition in our directory. The replication of
> this partition is not yet reliable.
On 4 January 2013 15:14, Dominic Evans wrote:
> Does the internal DNS server of samba4 not yet support CNAME lookups?
Another interesting thing I noted is that dns recursion also doesn't
appear to be working for this lookup.
i.e.,
$ dig @127.0.0.1 www.google.com +norecurse
\ returns no
I am currently in the progress of testing the replacement of a Windows
2003 DC with a Samba4-based one.
In the DNS of old Windows DC we had CNAME entries to alias
www.domain.com to serverX.domain.com and ftp.domain.com to
serverY.domain.com. This is working and can be tested successfully
with dig
On 28 December 2012 05:43, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>> $ sudo samba-tool ldapcmp ldap://windowsdc.exampledn.com
>> ldap://samba4dc.exampledn.com domain --base='CN=ExampleFirstName
>> ExampleSecondName,OU=OU,DC=exampledn,DC=com'
>> --base2='CN=ExampleFirstName
>> ExampleSecondName,OU=OU,DC=exampledn,
Hi,
I have a domain with a single Windows 2003 DC running. Today I created
a Samba4 DC (using 4.0.0 release) and asked it to join the existing
domain as an additional controller. Replication of both the objects
and dns entries appears to be working well, and the usual tests of
adding a user to one
14 matches
Mail list logo
