[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > OK, the really nasty bit about this is the implict mapping of existing
> > unix accounts to rids. I went to a lot of effor to try and get rid of
> > it - but the best I could do was hide it under a pile of interf
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote:
> and tdbsam should be the default passdb backend in 3.0. We should remove
> the smbpasswd file and provide a migration script.
Oh, this is radical. But it would make a *LOT* of stuff easier. Not sure if I
really like that.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> OK, the really nasty bit about this is the implict mapping of existing
> unix accounts to rids. I went to a lot of effor to try and get rid of
> it - but the best I could do was hide it under a pile of interfaces and
> pretend it wasn't there ;-)
>
Hi Andrew,
here's the documentation of ldap passwd sync...
metze
-
Stefan "metze" Metzmacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -Npur --exclude=CVS --exclude=*.bak --exclude=*.o --exclude=*.po --exclude=.#*
HEAD/docs/docbook/ma
Hi Andrew,
here's the documentation of ldap passwd sync...
metze
-
Stefan "metze" Metzmacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -Npur --exclude=CVS --exclude=*.bak --exclude=*.o --exclude=*.po --exclude=.#*
HEAD/docs/docbook/ma
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi!
>
> This is a surprisingly little (compiled, but not tested) patch that
> mainly should do the following:
>
> Implement a rid allocator in secrets.tdb. This might not be the right
> place to do it, but as we a
At 18:27 26.09.2002 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>Hi all!
>
>What kind of a value is the acct_ctrl argument of
>context_sam_enum_accounts supposed to be?
>
>It should be possible to list all accounts, that's why the current
>implementation isn't very usable...
list all accounts withacct_ctrl
Volker Lendecke wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 07:44:36AM +1000, Tim Potter wrote:
> > It is the wrong place to do it. If some data should only be accessible
> > by root then it should live in secrets.tdb otherwise it should go
> > somewhere else.
>
> I know. This is just experimental code
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 07:44:36AM +1000, Tim Potter wrote:
> It is the wrong place to do it. If some data should only be accessible
> by root then it should live in secrets.tdb otherwise it should go
> somewhere else.
I know. This is just experimental code playing with the thought how far you c
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, James Bowes wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have offered to test some trusts and migration scripts for this
> project. The CVS source configures well but does not build a usable
> Makefile. Just wondering if there's something I am missing
Well, I built the CVS tree just yesterday un
Hi.
I have offered to test some trusts and migration scripts for this
project. The CVS source configures well but does not build a usable
Makefile. Just wondering if there's something I am missing
--
James Bowes,
Senior Systems Consultant, Xisit
Ph: 604-535-6508 ext.305
email: [EMAIL PROTEC
"Gerald (Jerry) Carter" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>
> > OK, in HEAD I dropped 'ldap server' and 'ldap port' as parmaters, moving
> > to the 'passdb backend' scheme. However, this would mean that a valid
> > 2.2 configuration would not function in 3.0.
> >
> > This c
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> OK, in HEAD I dropped 'ldap server' and 'ldap port' as parmaters, moving
> to the 'passdb backend' scheme. However, this would mean that a valid
> 2.2 configuration would not function in 3.0.
>
> This change (and the bit I forgot - making ldapsam th
Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:18:01AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>
> > The problem isn't actually tdbsam, it's smbpasswd. Smbpasswd is giving
> > out dodgy made up values. See, we have a policy database that stores
> > the 'max password age' etc, but we don't do 'las
"Gerald (Jerry) Carter" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > Date: Fri Sep 27 01:02:37 2002
> > Author: abartlet
> >
> > Update of /data/cvs/samba/source
> > In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18726
> >
> > Modified Files:
> > configure.in configure
>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:18:01AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:20:19PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote about
>'Re: --wuth-tdbsam ?':
> > > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wr
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Date: Fri Sep 27 01:02:37 2002
> Author: abartlet
>
> Update of /data/cvs/samba/source
> In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18726
>
> Modified Files:
> configure.in configure
> Log Message:
> Readd the 2.2 --with-ldapsam paramat
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:28:38AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> "Gerald (Jerry) Carter" wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:20:06PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote about
>'--with-libsmbclient=no the default ?':
> > > > I thought libsmbcl
"Gerald (Jerry) Carter" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:20:06PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote about
>'--with-libsmbclient=no the default ?':
> > > I thought libsmbclient should be built by default in 3.0 ?
> > > When ( & why) did this
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> What should happen to features that are marked 'not required' on the
> roadmap ? Should these go into HEAD or 3_0 when they are developed? What
> about the sam system?
My opinion is that something that is not required for 3.0 to ship
should continue
Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:20:19PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote about 'Re:
>--wuth-tdbsam ?':
>
> > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>
> > > > Anyone?
>
> > > > Why do we
Dear Fellow Bridge Player:
We have some exciting events planned at OKbridge. We're sure you'll
want to join our club to get in on the fun!
Here is just a sample of what we have in store for you this fall:
OCTOBER GOLDWAY MATCH
On October 11, #1 ACBL Masterpoint Winner Paul Soloway and Richar
Tim Potter wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 01:47:38PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
>
> > To initiate this process we'd "only" need a standardized protocol for
> > the socket communication. Andrew said that doesn't exist and won't with
> > regard to winbind. I'd like to focus the discussion in t
Eddie Lania wrote:
>
> Does this also removes the bug that causes the user password time settings
> being changed, even when the cancel button is pressed in usermgr?
No, but my other commit (the patch from metze) could well have helped on
that.
Andrew Bartlett
--
Andrew Bartlett
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:29:51PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:30:44PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote about 'Re:
>--wuth-tdbsam ?':
> > > > and tdbsam should be the default passdb backend in 3.0. We should remove
> > > > the smbpasswd file and provide a migration scrip
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 01:47:38PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> To initiate this process we'd "only" need a standardized protocol for
> the socket communication. Andrew said that doesn't exist and won't with
> regard to winbind. I'd like to focus the discussion in this direction.
>
> - is the w
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 10:59:25PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is a surprisingly little (compiled, but not tested) patch that
> mainly should do the following:
>
> Implement a rid allocator in secrets.tdb. This might not be the right
> place to do it, but as we are one-domain with pas
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:29:09PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> With the release of 3.0alpha20, I'm declaring the official
> maintainence of the SAMBA_3_0 cvs branch. WHat this means
> is that there will be no more blind "copy HEAD onto SAMBA_3_0"
> for the next alpha. Any
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:02:51PM -0700, James Bowes wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I am not a developer but I'd like to help with testing if needed. The
> roadmap indicates some areas of interest for me personally and if you
> could use the help.
>
> Trust relationships and the migration script would be s
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 03:30:44PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote about 'Re:
--wuth-tdbsam ?':
> > > and tdbsam should be the default passdb backend in 3.0. We should remove
> > > the smbpasswd file and provide a migration script.
> > 'pdbedit -i smbpasswd -e tdbsam' does exactly that.. now we only
We recently migrated our PDC away
from Microsoft to SAMBA and have nearly completed the migration except for 1
little annoyance. Our SNAP server
is unable to view the users on the SAMBA PDC. I have RTFM’s,
googled for awhile, posted on the SAMBA-USERS mailing
list, and I’ve called quantum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
This is a surprisingly little (compiled, but not tested) patch that
mainly should do the following:
Implement a rid allocator in secrets.tdb. This might not be the right
place to do it, but as we are one-domain with passdb, RID allocation
is a g
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> This list will help to determine when the next alpha will go out
> so let's be reasonable and try to keep the snapshots on a regular
> basis. People might also want to consider committing to have a
> feature done by alpha XX for longer jobs.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:20:19PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote about 'Re:
>--wuth-tdbsam ?':
> > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> > > Anyone?
> > > Why do we still have a configure flag for this sinc
Folks,
With the release of 3.0alpha20, I'm declaring the official
maintainence of the SAMBA_3_0 cvs branch. WHat this means
is that there will be no more blind "copy HEAD onto SAMBA_3_0"
for the next alpha. Any bugs fixes into HEAD should also be fixed
in SAMBA_3_0. Developers are responsible
Heads up everyone,
Source release will be on download mirrors shorly.
This is provided as a non-production release of the
future 3.0 Samba codebase for testing purposes only.
Use at your own risk. Now that I've cleared by
conscience... :-)
-- enjoy,
-- The Samba Team
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:20:06PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote about
>'--with-libsmbclient=no the default ?':
> > I thought libsmbclient should be built by default in 3.0 ?
> > When ( & why) did this change ? Was it me ?
>
> According to conf
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:20:06PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote about
'--with-libsmbclient=no the default ?':
> I thought libsmbclient should be built by default in 3.0 ?
> When ( & why) did this change ? Was it me ?
According to configure.in, it is build by default if the OS has
support f
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:02:51PM -0700, James Bowes wrote about '(no subject)':
> I am not a developer but I'd like to help with testing if needed. The
> roadmap indicates some areas of interest for me personally and if you
> could use the help.
> Trust relationships and the migration script wo
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote about 'Re:
--wuth-tdbsam ?':
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> > Anyone?
> > Why do we still have a configure flag for this since it is selectable
> > at run time ?
I guees it used to be optional since
I thought libsmbclient should be built by default in 3.0 ?
When ( & why) did this change ? Was it me ?
jerry
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Anyone?
>
> Why do we still have a configure flag for this since it is selectable
> at run time ?
and tdbsam should be the default passdb backend in 3.0. We should remove
the smbpasswd file and provide a migration script.
Volker, we need to
Hi.
I am not a developer but I’d like to help with testing
if needed. The roadmap indicates some areas of interest for me personally and
if you could use the help…
Trust relationships and the migration script would be some
of the areas where I could help.
Let me know…
James
Anyone?
Why do we still have a configure flag for this since it is selectable
at run time ?
cheers, jerry
Well it is the W2k DC that has the 15 character name, not the client I
am attempting to join a Samba 3.0 client to a
w2k DC with a 15 character name... True it's not probably winbindd per se,
it just happens that I am using the "net rpc join" and winbindd to validate
users... Thanks,
Chuck
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am runing Samba-3.0-alpha18 winbindd and attempting to join a w2k domain
> that has a
> 15 character server name.. as you can see from the log below the name gets
> truncated to 14 characters which then results in the NT_STATUS_INVALID_COMPUTER_NAM
I am runing Samba-3.0-alpha18 winbindd and attempting to join a w2k domain
that has a
15 character server name.. as you can see from the log below the name gets
truncated to 14 characters which then results in the NT_STATUS_INVALID_COMPUTER_NAME
when attempting authenticationI am not at work to
Line of logon script
net time \\viagra /set /yes
The user is a created in the default RedHat group. The user is an
Administrator on the W2K box. When not logged into the Samba Server script
runs wonderfully. What group do I need to assure the user is in on the
Linux Box to allow time c
Hi all!
What kind of a value is the acct_ctrl argument of
context_sam_enum_accounts supposed to be?
It should be possible to list all accounts, that's why the current
implementation isn't very usable...
Jelmer
--
Jelmer Vernooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pendin
>Because DCE/RPC is *horrible* ? :-) :-). If you need a new
>RPC protocol please use ONC/RPC/NDR not DCE :-).
I agree, I think I've grown a few gray hairs from DCE. I guess
the argument in favour of it depends on how similar the kinds
of lookups WINE needs to make are to existing, implemented,
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 12:50:57AM +1000, Luke Howard wrote:
>
> > - is the winbind team willing to standardize the protocol, or at least
> > ensure backward compatibility in future versions?
>
> Rather than inventing new protocols, why not just use DCE RPC over domain
> sockets or TCP/IP?
>
> - is the winbind team willing to standardize the protocol, or at least
> ensure backward compatibility in future versions?
Rather than inventing new protocols, why not just use DCE RPC over domain
sockets or TCP/IP?
The only catch is that you need a DCE RPC client library. We're using the
O
Does this also removes the bug that causes the user password time settings
being changed, even when the cancel button is pressed in usermgr?
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew Bartlett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Kai Krueger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Eddie Lania" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAI
Kai Krueger wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Eddie Lania" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002
> 8:47 PM
>
> > I haven't got this to work altough I have read several mails now on this
> > list of people that seem to have it working.
> > I was wondering how this
Hi all, I've had a long ride setting up SAMBA and Winbind, essentially
whatI'm trying to do at the moment is transfer the file server from the
Win2kserver to a Linux machine to east the strain and spread the network
trafficout over different switches.I am using SAMBA 2.2.5 and Debian
3.0.I h
Imho the best way to go, is to wait until we will be able to provide an
interface for loadable modules in samba that couples with the MS-RPC
subsystem.
At that point you will only need to make the .so library as GPL and
build your socket mechanism to speak to the other LGPLed end integrated
into w
Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 19.38 schrieb Richard Sharpe:
> I do not think that libsmbclient is the right way to do this. I think that
> the correct way is to make the various Samba client RPC libaries available
> as separate DSOs so that clients can make dirrect use of what they need.
> Then the wi
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>
> "Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jerry,
> >
> > please don't kick 3.0alpha20 before this is fixed. Andrew B. optimizes my
> > patch...
>
> metze, I want to get that patch 'right', so I may take some time...
>
> In particular, you changed the parsing for t
Hi All,
I would like to to know how to, using rc.local in the /etc/rc.d directory,
automate a smbmount with a specific username upon bootup.
In this case because I can't find any examples and I am not a very strong
linux user, I have posted all the relevant info.
The server name
Kai,
Thank you, it works exactly like you told me.
Loggin in as root from a workstation works for usermgr.
Eddie.
- Original Message -
From: "Kai Krueger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Eddie Lania" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 11:21 AM
Subjec
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:45:03AM +0200, Olaf Frączyk wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 22:05, Shane Tapper wrote:
> >
> > How do I set the clock through a logon script if I wish to keep the user a
> > standard user
> >
> > line of logon script
> > net time \\viagra /set /yes
> You have to add
- Original Message -
From: "Eddie Lania" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002
8:47 PM
> I haven't got this to work altough I have read several mails now on this
> list of people that seem to have it working.
> I was wondering how this should be done.
> I can start Use
Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
>
> At 07:13 26.09.2002 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Jerry,
> > >
> > > please don't kick 3.0alpha20 before this is fixed. Andrew B. optimizes my
> > > patch...
> >
> >metze, I want to get that patch 'right', so I may
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 22:05, Shane Tapper wrote:
>
> How do I set the clock through a logon script if I wish to keep the user a
> standard user
>
> line of logon script
> net time \\viagra /set /yes
You have to add this right to standard users group on Windows.
This is something like: Per
64 matches
Mail list logo
