Hi,
During our test on the the migration from the AS/U /Advanced Server for
Unix) based domain to a Samba-ldap based domain, we have found and
fixed some bugs on the smbldap tools of Idealx. In attachment you would
find the improved tools package. The main changes are:
- smbldap-migra
Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> We are always interested in things that add functionality into samba.
> If you wish to send some patches we can look at, you are welcome.
I was originally bouncing ideas back and forth on this (and sitting on
patches etc :-), but if you want to case it up you are more than w
Hi Andrew,
here's the newest version of my connection caching patch.
I used it for a few days without problems...
metze
-
Stefan "metze" Metzmacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -Npur --exclude=CVS --exclude=*.bak --exclude
Hi all,
I have been having some problems with winbind not seeing all the groups that users on
my AD domain are in. Upon further investigation, it seems that winbind only enumerates
one group.
Doing a 'wbinfo -r $AD_USER' only shows one group (even if the AD user belongs to many
groups, doesnt
Sorry about this, but this email address seems to be a bit dodgy. Please reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks, James
- Original Message -
From: "James Braid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 1:45 PM
Subject: Winbind doesnt enumerate more than one group from an AD domain
> Hi all,
>
> I have been having some problems with winbind not seeing all the groups
that us
"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> here's the newest version of my connection caching patch.
>
> I used it for a few days without problems...
This looks like a very well done patch, nice work!
I'll see what I can do in applying this sometime soon...
Andrew Bartlett
--
And
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Chris de Vidal wrote:
> I'd be happy to let the group know. I'm not positive
> we'll reenable anything but kernel oplocks, though.
> We have work to do.
The "kernel oplocks" parameter affects how Unix processes accessing the
file interact with SMB oplocks. Enabling kernel op
"Christopher R. Hertel" wrote:
>
> I've been known to do things the other way, with nmbd running on a system
> that isn't running smbd. I set nmbd to act as a WINS server and Domain
> Master Browser to handle the namespace issues, but I don't offer any
> file services.
Doesn't that break browse
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gareth Davies wrote:
> Apparently they need to be Global or Universal to be shown by Winbind.
Local groups are supported by winbindd using rpc. The LDAP backends for
winbindd needs this support added (it's a no-op function righ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please post general use questions to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list (see http://lists.samba.org/listinfo/samba for details).
The samba-technical mailing is for discussions of Samba
internals and development issues. Thanks.
cheers, jerry
On Wed, 23 O
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi...
>
> I still have a hope that you can help me...
>
> I have to write a program that send text messages over SMB (AKA winpopup
> messages), but have trouble. I do following things:
> 1) Resolving ma
"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> here's a proposal for the idmap api;
>
> we'll have a cache that will be asked first, if this fails we ask the
> central idmap and add the result to our cache.
>
> the idmap_central_* functions should be plugable/selectable (different
> backends sh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The original thread for this starts here in case anyone needs it
http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/2002-October/040119.html
John,
Does this look like your bug ?
http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/2002-October/083160.html
I'm
At 21:09 25.10.2002 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> here's a proposal for the idmap api;
>
> we'll have a cache that will be asked first, if this fails we ask the
> central idmap and add the result to our cache.
>
> the idmap_central_* functions should
Hi Jerry,
That looks exactly like my problem -- tons of open FDs but only on directories,
not files.
Unfortunately I haven't made any further progress in troubleshooting this. I
walked through the debugging messages and matched them to whats in the source.
It seems like it should be working. B
At 10:29 23.10.2002 -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 09:54:49AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote
about 'Planning 3.0alpha21 for Friday (10/25)':
> > FYI...
> >
> > Just givin
"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
>
> At 21:09 25.10.2002 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
> > > /* idmap api */
> > > NT_STATUS idmap_sid_to_id(DOM_SID *sid, int *id, BOOL *group);
> >
> >I don't like this bit. I would prefer it returned somthing that was
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
After exluding these files from the diff
configure
CVS
*proto.h
The diff is still rather large. NMow I'm a little skeptical to think that
all the changes in HEAD are not meant for 3.0. My other conclusion is
that people have not been mergin
I'm trying to set up multiple PDCs on a single machine using virtual
interfaces, after the Solaris PC Netlink model. I'm using a Debian
woodie Linux system.
I have two copies of smbd/nmbd running, with the second on a virtual
interface and doing chroot to isolate the config files, copies of the
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gareth Davies wrote:
>
> > Apparently they need to be Global or Universal to be shown by Winbind.
>
> Local groups are supported by winbindd using rpc. The LDAP backends for
> winbindd needs this support added (it's a no-o
Hi,
I am facing problem with deleting drivers from the server. I am using
rpcclient tool to delete drivers. 'deldriver' is implemented in
cmd_spoolss.c. Kindly let me know if anything can be done.
Thanx
Harish
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 20:52, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gareth Davies wrote:
> >
> > > Apparently they need to be Global or Universal to be shown by Winbind.
> >
> > Local groups are supported by winbindd using rpc.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote:
> you mean local groups within the S-1-5-32 sid sub tree or the local
> domain groups under the PDC SID ? If that's the first case, winbind
> shouldn't even read them, they have no meaning outsi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25 Oct 2002, Simo Sorce wrote:
> JF is totally right winbind should never ask for PDCs local group.
> But there is a third option, MS has defined an obscure (to me) new type
> of group in w2k, the global local group do you mean this one jerry?
Dom
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 08:33:32PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> "Christopher R. Hertel" wrote:
> >
> > I've been known to do things the other way, with nmbd running on a system
> > that isn't running smbd. I set nmbd to act as a WINS server and Domain
> > Master Browser to handle the namespace
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 10:40:59AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote about 'Comparing
SAMBA_3_0 to HEAD':
> After exluding these files from the diff
> configure
> CVS
> *proto.h
> The diff is still rather large. NMow I'm a little skeptical to think that
> all the changes in HEAD are not
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote:
>
> > you mean local groups within the S-1-5-32 sid sub tree or the local
> > domain groups under the PDC SID ? If that's the first cas
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 21:55, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Domain local groups existed under Windows NT 4.0. They were just
> available among DC's of the domain. See my other post in response to JF.
To my knowledge (derived from some doc on msdn) they are a different
thing. local groups (same
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Jean Francois Micouleau wrote:
> ok then it's still a problem of vocabulary :) Can we settle on a
> definitive wording ?
>
> local groups, domain groups, domain local groups, universal groups.
Fine by me :-)
cheers, jerry
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am facing problem with deleting drivers from the server. I am using
> rpcclient tool to delete drivers. 'deldriver' is implemented in
> cmd_spoolss.c. Kindly let me know if anything can be done.
What f
David Collier-Brown -- Customer Engineering wrote:
>There are also some sharable filesystems that could
> result in two sambae sharing the same files: supposedy
> my employer sells one (:-))
:-)
Yes, I considered NFS, but only as as way to allow the two
Sambae to be on separate machines and s
"Gerald (Jerry) Carter" wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> After exluding these files from the diff
>
> configure
> CVS
> *proto.h
>
> The diff is still rather large. NMow I'm a little skeptical to think that
> all the changes in HEAD are not meant for 3.0. M
"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" wrote:
>
> At 10:29 23.10.2002 -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 09:54:49AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote
> > about 'Planning
Urban Widmark wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>
> > Just giving everyone a heads up. I will also roll RPMS
> > for the various RedHat versions on this release.
>
> Any chance of someone reviewing and possibly adding these changes before
> then? I first posted this o
Luis Muñoz wrote:
>
> Dear folks:
>
> First of all, thanks for a great product and please do keep up your fine
> job with samba.
>
> As a humble contribution to your project, below is a patch to configure.in
> that allows libsmbclient.so to be correctly built in my system (Mac with
> Mac OS X).
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:44:03PM +1000, Matthew Hannigan wrote:
> Well, my specific example (which I noticed you avoided :-)
> was two sambas sharing the same files:
> You're not alone, everyone is ducking this question :-)
> Here it is again, just in case:
> Excellent, so two other
Steve Langasek wrote:
> If oplock support is disabled, yes, you can expect two Samba
> installations to play nicely with locks on the same set of files. If
> oplocking is enabled, it might also be possible to make them behave,
> though this would at least require some symlink magic.
There
Reading through Jeremy's eagerly awaited discourse on oplocks/share
modes/locking, I read this bit :
> ... if you need simultaneous
> file access from a Windows and UNIX client you *must* have an
> application that is written to lock records correctly on both
> sides. Few applications are written
39 matches
Mail list logo
