that specific case, clobbering over a file she didn't
actually own, the file copied would get a fresh timestamp.
The first thing I did was try Samba 3.0.23d to see if perhaps
it was fixed in that version. Lo and behold it was, the issue went away
immediately upon upgrading to 3.0.23d.
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 09:12:52 -0600
"Gerald \(Jerry\) Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom,
>
> I've got to step up for Carsten here.
>
> Tom Schaefer wrote:
>
> > Carsten Schaub <
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:05:48 +0100
Carsten Schaub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> the security=share setting does not behave as many admins expect. Access
It behaves exactly as this admin expects and I would absolutely hate to see it
to go.
> to all shares are mapped to the guest ac
your case.
Good luck.
Tom Schaefer
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:57:56 +0200
"Julien Ailhaud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Problem summary :
> Files created with samba2 are now unreadable with samba3. I tested all
> possible settings in samba, rebuild it wit
28.
Possibly you have two gids both named NCEDOM\dev-iis and it isn't gid
16777328 that the iis directory belongs to.
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
seems
like something I myself could potentially make use of as a feature.
In summary my votes are:
Make the change? yes
Option to allow current behaviour? no opinion
Tom Schaefer
On Tue, 10 May 2005 12:25:49 -0700
Jeremy Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I ca
n have a ``dual personality''.
This parameter is not available when Samba listens on
port 445, as clients no longer send this information.
Tom Schaefer
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:31:23 -0600
John H Terpstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It is possible.
&g
if you typed "attrib -r " it would fix the problem.
>
Only if dos filemode = yes
By the way, this whole "issue" is not a new one. I set up this same
scenario last night on an old Linux Mandrake 8 box running Samba 2.2.7a
and the behavior was exactly the same.
Tom Sc
still there
as well. I noticed Jeremy requesting level 10 debug logs on the bug
tracking page. I'll send some as soon as I can.
Tom Schaefer
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:45:46 +0200
Peter Kruse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > On Mon
ell. It did not. I noticed there is a new message in this thread
posted from Yannick Bergeron stating he applied the patch and rebuilt
3.0.14a from scratch this morning and the problem persists for him as
well.
Tom Schaefer
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 11:35:12 -0500
"Peter Kruse" <[EMAIL
'm usually at the daycare loading the kids into the car
at this time of day and thats 12 miles or so from here.
Jeremy, thankyou much for all your hard work and prompt support.
Tom Schaefer
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:31:40 -0700
Jeremy Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm
t have you actually tried it against 3.0.14a yet?
Tom Schaefer
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:49:10 -0500
"Peter Kruse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (please see below)
>
> Jeremy Allison wrote:
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/accounts/staff/schaefer/tmp ba
Sparc Solaris / UFS file system. I have some ACL's set up for a handful
of users and its all worked flawlessly with every incarnation of Samba
I've used over the past couple years, which would be most.
Last Friday evening I upgraded from 3.0.11 to 3.0.13 and some of the users
I have some ACL's se
Adding the following line to your smb.conf file ought to do the trick..
encrypt passwords = no
I believe that was the default in 2.x whereas in 3.x encrypt passwords = yes is
the default.
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:44:12 -0400
"Faleti, Ade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am in the proce
This may or may not apply to your case as I'm not doing ldap authentication,
however the "add user script" directive in smb.conf has served me very well for
the past couple of years.
Tom Schaefer
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:12:58 +0100
Luís Miguel Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
name field supplies against all the usernames specified in the
username directive for the share. Username = %S is very useful for homes
shares.
Check it out, I really think it could do the trick for you.
Tom Schaefer
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:33:45 -0800
Jules Agee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
of sharing where you set a
password to access a folder and then access it from XP. You'll see the
same thing - greyed out guest.
Tom Schaefer
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:01:49 -0800
Jules Agee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> > Jules Agee:
> >
> &
Tom Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Samba is a domain member server authenticating to a MS-Windows domain
> controller.
>
> With 3.0.7 and all previous version for the past few years I could map a
> Windows to Unix userid in the username map file like so..
>
>
00 of them require username mappings
in my username map file and they all access their home share as
\\servername\%username%.
Have mercy on me oh gods of Samba.
Thankyou,
Tom Schaefer
Unix Admistrator
University of Missouri St. Louis
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL an
nces though its been great on all 6 servers and
a couple test ones.
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
took the uid/gid info out of the shares listing
in the first place. You say the information is "not valid" but how do you mean
that? Not valid in the sense that I'm seeing effective uids and gids and not
the "true" uid/gid of the connected user or not valid as in "scr
eans of verifying my "force user"
and/or "force group" directives worked.
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
cfusion2
but there's no way to know that. Btw, no, smbstatus -v doesn't
show it either.
Basically this message is just a plea to the Samba developers to put back
the uid and gid information.
Thankyou,
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
I think what you are looking for is the "root preexec" directive. Its explained in
the smb.conf man page.
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:13:23 -0800
Norman Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I checked useradd only creates home folders but not others. I could
> write a bash script
>
> SHARED=/shar
hat I do is put an entry in
c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\lmhosts like...
myservername 127.0.0.1
And then you can get to it as \\myservername\sharename
Tom Schaefer
Information Technology Services
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:06:19 -
"Paul Gardiner" &l
e yourself and
consequently some more data points as to what might exactly the problem
might be somebody can figure out the fix.
Tom Schaefer
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:01:52 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a different Samba and Mac OS 10.3 question. I have a small
network in > my office
er/TheFindByContentFolder/TheVolumeSettingsFolder/
>
> ; When deleting, remove those hidden veto files as well.
> delete veto files = yes
> ---snip---
>
> Make sure you aren't blocking the creation/deletion of dot files (as
> Will suggested).
>
> Phil
>
>
quot; by default, I don't know why it would matter but I'm going to
try a "hide dot files = no" today.
Thanks,
Tom Schaefer
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:25:33 -0500
"William Enestvedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this related to handling of files with r
Its pretty simple really, just check out the "username map" parameter.
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:35:08 -0500
Lisa Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am currently migrating from a samba/nis authe
out from Samba to the PCs. So I'm scrambling
for a solution.
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:15:42 +
Jinn Koriech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been having very similar problems on RedHad-7.3 with Samba 2.2.7-3.7.3.
&g
out from Samba to the PCs. So I'm scrambling
for a solution.
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:15:42 +
Jinn Koriech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been having very similar problems on RedHad-7.3 with Samba 2.2.7-3.7.3.
&g
= root
writeable = yes
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:34:20 +0200
LeVA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LeVA wrote:
> > Tom Dickson wrote:
> >
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: S
= root
writeable = yes
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:34:20 +0200
LeVA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LeVA wrote:
> > Tom Dickson wrote:
> >
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: S
It should behave as you expect, a read only share is a read only share period no
matter what the UNIX permissions are. At least thats been my experience with it and
what the man page seems to suggest. I am very surprised at what you are seeing.
Tom Schaefer
UNIX Administrator
University of
at not, but I think Chris's comment above hits the nail right on the head. Can
we please have the valid users = %S functionality back?
Thankyou,
Tom Schaefer
Unix Administrator
University of Missouri Saint Louis
> Regardless, local access and MS share access are really two different th
tently fail file copies using the Finder 100% of the time.
If anybody else could post any success or failure reports with samba and Macintosh OS
10.2.x clients particularly if the server OS is Solaris it might be very useful.
Tom Schaefer
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:01:30 -0500
Tom Schaefer <[EMAI
o the trash, often you will get an error - "The operation cannot be completed because
the item "" is in use.
Hopefully some of you all will replicate it (I really don't think anyone who tries
will have any trouble at all replicating it) and/or more importantly somebody can come
e is called "serveur ftp anonyme" not "serveur ftp a" so of course its going to
fail. Maybe you've got a syntax error in the batch file or script or whatever you're
running on pcvideo to get it to connect to the services on your samba server?
Tom Schaefer
On Th
as in fact been deleted. If the folder had subfolders, you
click ok and the error message disappears but the folder name does not disappear from
Windows Explorer, even though it actually has been deleted, and no amount of clicking
View/Refresh will make it disappear.
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscr
a share they have access to, it might take
me a week or more to discover it, so if they are doing some scanning of their own they
can catch it that much quicker.
Tom Schaefer
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
ld NOT get backed up in
that evenings incremental backup, they wouldn't get backed up until the next full
backup was done.
Hundreds of Megs of files being moved off of PCs onto the samba serveer is VERY common
around here.
Tom Schaefer
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:36:41 -0500
Jon Niehof &l
rton Anti Virus installed and I think my huge incremental backups are
coming from PCs that have used NAV that day to scan their Samba "network drives" thus
resetting the ctime on every file that is scanned and therefore every scanned file
that day becomes part of the incremental backup
ndows 2000 box.
It just doesn't work on my server. :(
I guess, all I'm asking is that if anybody else has seen this problem, please speak up.
Thankyou,
Tom Schaefer
> You might try setting in your smb.conf [globals]:
> log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
> max log size =
week and am
still experiencing this problem so I've decided to finally post about it.
Tom Schaefer
I
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
44 matches
Mail list logo
