On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Mark wrote:
> "John H Terpstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > This is a poor solution. The 'force user' and 'force group' directives
> > have serious side-effects and should be avoided if possible,
>
> I have a lot of shares defined with f
"John H Terpstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This is a poor solution. The 'force user' and 'force group' directives
> have serious side-effects and should be avoided if possible,
I have a lot of shares defined with force user and I've been experimenting
with oth
Jerry,
Thanks for that - yes -once i removed the admin user and restarted samba it
used the username in the force user field. many thanks
- Original Message -
From: "Gerald (Jerry) Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "info" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, info wrote:
> Yes I had the Admin useres set as well as the valid users. I had
> entered a number of usernames in both. Should this make a difference?
By definition, a user in the "admin users" list will operate as root.
> I deleted the entries in admin users and then c
Jerry,
Yes I had the Admin useres set as well as the valid users. I had entered a
number of usernames in both. Should this make a difference? I deleted the
entries in admin users and then created a new file but the owner was still
set to root.!?!?
I still have the force user set to apache but
