hi,happy new year
holly
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 02:33, Irving Carrion wrote:
> Hello and Happy New Year!
>
> I'm considering going to 2.2.7 version of Samba, but currently I'm at
> 3.0. Is it possible to do this smoothly without having to re-join all
> client machines to the domain?
Extract the domain sid, and place into
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 04:29, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi (metze)!
>
> In HEAD and 3_0 log files I find that the debug messages from
> pdb_get_set are a bit annoying. I would like to put them at debug
> level 11.
>
> Would that be ok with you?
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 11:39, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 06:28:48PM -0600, Kenneth Stephen wrote:
>
> > > ADS-style Kerberos support only works when both client and server are
> > > Kerberos-aware, so such Kerberos "encrypted passwords" support would be
> > > limited to Win2K a
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 11:31, Kenneth Stephen wrote:
>
>
> On 3 Jan 2003, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 10:50, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Hi Kenneth,
> > >
> > > It appears that the --with-krb5 option is currently used in connection
> > > with exactly this feature, and that
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 06:28:48PM -0600, Kenneth Stephen wrote:
> > ADS-style Kerberos support only works when both client and server are
> > Kerberos-aware, so such Kerberos "encrypted passwords" support would be
> > limited to Win2K and WinXP clients. This is a question of technical
> > feasib
On 3 Jan 2003, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 10:50, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Hi Kenneth,
> >
> > It appears that the --with-krb5 option is currently used in connection
> > with exactly this feature, and that the previous plaintext Kerberos
> > support has been dropped in 3.0.
>
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Kenneth,
>
> ADS-style Kerberos support only works when both client and server are
> Kerberos-aware, so such Kerberos "encrypted passwords" support would be
> limited to Win2K and WinXP clients. This is a question of technical
> feasibility, not of
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 10:50, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Kenneth,
>
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 03:38:47PM -0600, Kenneth Stephen wrote:
>
> > I am trying to understand the state of Samba using Kerberos
> > authentication. I see from a search on the web that ADS support is now
> > available in S
Hi Kenneth,
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 03:38:47PM -0600, Kenneth Stephen wrote:
> I am trying to understand the state of Samba using Kerberos
> authentication. I see from a search on the web that ADS support is now
> available in Samba, and presumably this uses an encrypted password
> communic
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 04:23, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> > Yep, I think I changed the order of that test - because we use use the
> > 'snum' attached to the vuid if possible, so as to avoid expensive
> > lookups. The correct fix would be t
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 03:56:39PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 02:23:09PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > > > I consider confusing smbpasswd with the Unix passwd command a sign that
> > > > one doesn't really have that much kno
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 02:23:09PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> > > I consider confusing smbpasswd with the Unix passwd command a sign that
> > > one doesn't really have that much knowledge, at least where smbpasswd
> > > itself is concerned. It's ea
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 02:23:09PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > I consider confusing smbpasswd with the Unix passwd command a sign that
> > one doesn't really have that much knowledge, at least where smbpasswd
> > itself is concerned. It's easy to jump to the conclusion that smbpasswd
> > needs
Hi,
I am trying to understand the state of Samba using Kerberos
authentication. I see from a search on the web that ADS support is now
available in Samba, and presumably this uses an encrypted password
communicated over the network rather than the behaviour that was
previously available vi
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 01:27:01PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 10:47:32AM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > > > For some time now, I've been patching smbpasswd to get rid of the
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 01:27:01PM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 10:47:32AM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > > For some time now, I've been patching smbpasswd to get rid of the
> > > effective UID "detection" that it does. In 2.2
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 10:47:32AM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > For some time now, I've been patching smbpasswd to get rid of the
> > effective UID "detection" that it does. In 2.2.7a it simply tests if the
> > effective UID differs from the real UI
I am using an experimental configuration of samba with ldap.
LDAP is used for linux login and imap authentication.
Samba is used for domain login and file sharing.
I have got the following ldap|pam|samba stuff installed on the system
pam-0.75-25mdk
samba-client-2.2.6-1.1mdk
nss_ldap-202-1.1mdk
Thanks for the response!
IRV
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Gerald
(Jerry) Carter
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:47 PM
To: Irving Carrion
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Going from 3.0 to 2.2.7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 11:45:56AM -0600, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>
> > So, while it is clear that there are assholes in the world,
> > there are also those who make it all worth while.
>
> Rich
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 10:47:32AM -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> For some time now, I've been patching smbpasswd to get rid of the
> effective UID "detection" that it does. In 2.2.7a it simply tests if the
> effective UID differs from the real UID, and if the effective UID is
> 'root' then it ba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Irving Carrion wrote:
> I'm considering going to 2.2.7 version of Samba, but currently I'm at
> 3.0. Is it possible to do this smoothly without having to re-join all
> client machines to the domain?
Probably will be painful. We
Hello Samba folks;
For some time now, I've been patching smbpasswd to get rid of the
effective UID "detection" that it does. In 2.2.7a it simply tests if the
effective UID differs from the real UID, and if the effective UID is
'root' then it bails:
/* Check the effective uid - make sure w
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 01:01:19PM +0100, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > My idea was this:
> > let make it so taht if unix extensions are enabled, then we NEVER
> > resolve the links if we permit link creation.
>
> So if unix extensions are "true", th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> So, while it is clear that there are assholes in the world,
> there are also those who make it all worth while.
Richard,
Why are you posting this to the list ? There could be any number of
reasons why s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi (metze)!
In HEAD and 3_0 log files I find that the debug messages from
pdb_get_set are a bit annoying. I would like to put them at debug
level 11.
Would that be ok with you?
Volker
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Yep, I think I changed the order of that test - because we use use the
> 'snum' attached to the vuid if possible, so as to avoid expensive
> lookups. The correct fix would be to fix lp_add_home() not to overwrite
> things when it finds that the hom
On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 01:01:19PM +0100, Simo Sorce wrote:
> My idea was this:
> let make it so taht if unix extensions are enabled, then we NEVER
> resolve the links if we permit link creation.
So if unix extensions are "true", then all opens set O_NOFOLLOW.
Ok if O_NOFOLLOW is defined and exist
Hello and Happy New Year!
I'm considering going to 2.2.7 version of Samba, but currently I'm at
3.0. Is it possible to do this smoothly without having to re-join all
client machines to the domain?
Any comments really appreciated!
Thanks!
Have people had a chance to look at these patches and consider
committing them to SAMBA? They're really simple and come with
documentation mods, and they'd make life easier for a lot of
sysadmins. Gerald had said back on 2002-09-25 that he wanted to get
these committed, but by then the patches I ha
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 14:26, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> At 00:10 03.01.2003 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >Talloc doesn't work that way, and should not be made to work that way.
> >If you want that, then you have malloc() and free().
>
> I think it would be a nice (and usefull!) to have
At 00:10 03.01.2003 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
*** PGP Signature Status: good
*** Signer: Andrew Francis Bartlett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Invalid)
*** Signed: 02.01.2003 14:10:23
*** Verified: 02.01.2003 14:22:37
*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 23:51, Stefan (metze) Metz
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 23:51, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> >This doesn't seem right - why not just free and replace that talloc
> >context?
>
> I only want to free one segment in the talloc context and all other
> talloced memory in this talloc context should not be free'ed!
>
> > > a also
At 09:07 01.01.2003 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 02:44, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> here are the parametric option changes of my big patch...
>
> all lp_param_*() functions now take the default value as last parameter
> this is usefull for all fn's and neede
On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 21:35, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 01:01:19PM +0100, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > My idea was this:
> > let make it so taht if unix extensions are enabled, then we NEVER
> > resolve the links if we permit link creation.
> > If we do not want to have it so rigid, w
36 matches
Mail list logo
