Am 2017-09-26 um 15:32 schrieb L.P.H. van Belle via samba:> So IMHO, very inconistant results. > > So any more thoughts about this?I can't follow that anymore and don't know if and what to fix/change/set ... No complaining, just no idea.
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:00:25 +0200 "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> Am 2017-09-26 um 15:32 schrieb L.P.H. van Belle via samba: > > > So IMHO, very inconistant results. > > > > So any more thoughts about this? > > I can't follow that anymore and don't know if and what to > fix/change/set ... > > No complaining, just no idea. > > >Very simple Stefan, there is a bug and a simple workaround, never (not ever) run 'wbinfo -G 100' on a DC if you have given Domain Users a gidNumber ;-) Rowland
Am 2017-09-26 um 16:16 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba:> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:00:25 +0200 > "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >> I can't follow that anymore and don't know if and what to >> fix/change/set ... >> >> No complaining, just no idea. > > Very simple Stefan, there is a bug and a simple workaround, never (not > ever) run 'wbinfo -G 100' on a DC if you have given Domain Users a > gidNumber ;-)ay, Sir ;-) ok with me
Am 2017-09-26 um 16:16 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba:> Very simple Stefan, there is a bug and a simple workaround, never (not > ever) run 'wbinfo -G 100' on a DC if you have given Domain Users a > gidNumber ;-)hit the same issue with a domain group today (DC and DM w/ samba-4.6.8) Solution: net cache flush, recreate the group via samba-tool, and --gid-number before that the group had a gid of 3000013 and wasn't shown on the DM, even when the idmap range there was up to 9999999. Your reported bug still sits there unnoticed, right? Stefan