On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Lowell C. Savage wrote:> I didn't see a description in the various messages of where the file actually > is written. If it is written to the \\server\netlogon directory, don't you > get a locking problem with two or more users loggin in? I mean, if you have > a slow client logging on with one user, and a moment later, another user > logging on another client. If the file is actually changed before the first > client gets to the point in its netlogon.bat script where it is using the > reg file, does the first machine then create a registration entry that puts > user1 in user2's profile location? Is this a problem?It certainly would have been, but there are a whole range of options to avoid the problem - 1. Give the file a username-specific filename 2. Give the file a client machine-specific filename 3. Put the file on the client's C: 4. Put the file in the user's home directory 5. Let's see, using the smbd's pid? Currently, I'm using option 4. Regards ---------------------------------------------------------------|-----|-- Louis Mandelstam Tel +27 83 227-0712 Symphony /|\ /|\ Linux systems integration http://sr.co.za Research { } { } Johannesburg, South Africa mailto:louis@sr.co.za (Pty)Ltd {___} {___}
Hi> This is the first I have seen this mentioned. We are able to > to patch WIN98 clients and all Win95 clients to work with an older > version of samba domain logon using "plain text" passwords - but are unable > to get working the latest version. Where did you find this reference? > Would this explain why we haven't been able to get the most recent release > of samba to accept plain text logons...I seem to have mixed things up... it's NT that does not do domain logons without the server supporting encrypted passwords. I have played around with win95-domain logons a bit, and it seem that win95-domain-logons are, in fakt .) connecting to the netlogon share, with username & password .) executing login-script found there .) merging policies with registry while nt uses special smb-"api"-calls... This is, however, only what my impression is after playing around a bit. Greetings, Florian Pflug
Hello,> It looks like tha I have the same problem as you haveYes, I encountered very similar problems but under FreeBSD. I doubt it has anything to do with the OS, but my thread has been either ignored or missed.> I just posted: > " > I am running samba 2.07 on linux (suse7). > Client is Win98se both on 100MbitFD (auto) > Testing with a 85MB File > reading is ~4MB/sec > writeing is ~0.5MB/sec > after the writing a lot transfer errors are shown > by "ifconfig eth0" > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:03:6D:13:7F:AF > inet addr:10.10.1.10 Bcast:10.10.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 > inet6 addr: fe80::3:6d13:7faf/10 Scope:Link > inet6 addr: fe80::203:6dff:fe13:7faf/10 Scope:Link > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:152178 errors:6733 dropped:0 overruns:6733 frame:6733 > TX packets:160029 errors:3 dropped:0 overruns:3 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > Interrupt:12 Base address:0x2000 > > same file transfered with ftp r/w ~3.5MB/sec. > " > My NIC is a Linksys (Tulip) card.You seem to have a lot of errors which could very possibly be because of bad cabling or a lot of crosstalk. You also seem to have 'zero' collisions, thus using a Layer2 switch, or is it crossover? Richard