samba - Aug 2002 - Are these BUGS? anyone experienced either of these?

I have experienced a couple of (minor) problems with Samba

Thought I would report these and ask if they are known problems.

1. Problem with "!" in username map file

2. Samba tools e.g. smbstatus, testparm not accounting for "config
file"
parameter


1.  There appears to be a problem with a minor part of username map file
interpretation.

     When I put an exclamation mark before a line in the file, that is supposed
     to stop any further mapping if a match has already been made.
     That's what I understand to be the case.
     This is not happening for me.

     When I connect from a Win2k machine as Administrator, the log file
     records the mapping from Administrator to smbadmin,
     then instead of stopping after the ! exclamation point line,
     it continues on and maps with the  wildcard mapping.

     Can anyone else verify this behaviour for me.

     Below is a sample of my username map file and
     the log file.

     username map file
     smbadmin = administrator Administrator
     nobody = user1
     nobody = user2
     nobody = user3
     ...
     !nobody = user99

     nobody = *

     ;The ! means to stop processing file after this line if a match has already
 been made.
     ;Otherwise, process the next line...


     samba log file
     [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
       Mapped user Administrator to smbadmin
     [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
       Mapped user smbadmin to nobody


2.  Samba tools not processing "config file"

     I use the "config file" parameter in my conf file (allows me to
use
different
     conf files depending on the server)
     The problem is that  the Samba tools do not take this line into account.
     The two that I have noticed are testparm and smbstatus.
     Testparm returns the default settings instead of my settings for conf file.
     smbstatus says it can't find the lock file, since the config file tells
it
     where to find it (it looks in default location).

Not major concerns, but worth reporting I think.
I'm not sure if other tools/processes don't 'traverse' the
"config file"
parameter
but it could be a problem.

Has this been a problem for anyone else?
I know I could remove the config file param and put the file in the standard
location
but this would muck up the current system.   :-(

Any comments welcome, about fixes / planned fixes or experience with either of
these
problems.

thanks
-peter.
p.s.  using Samba 2.2.5, Win2k and Solaris 8








************************************************************
Opinions contained in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect
the opinions of the Queensland Department of Main Roads,
Queensland Transport or National Transport Secretariat, or
endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure.
If you have received this electronic mail message in error,
please immediately notify the sender and delete the message
from your computer.
************************************************************

I think, your first problem is not a bug, because in the man page of
smb.conf the using of the "!" in the username map means that the
mapping is
stopped, when a mapping is done by the (current) line.
In your example, the mapping stops only when user99 was mapped.

So you have to put a "!" in every line except the last line.

Bernd
> -----Original Message-----
> From: peter.a.bryant@mainroads.qld.gov.au
> [mailto:peter.a.bryant@mainroads.qld.gov.au]
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 9:57 AM
> To: samba@lists.samba.org
> Subject: [Samba] Are these BUGS? anyone experienced either of these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have experienced a couple of (minor) problems with Samba
> 
> Thought I would report these and ask if they are known problems.
> 
> 1. Problem with "!" in username map file
> 
> 2. Samba tools e.g. smbstatus, testparm not accounting for 
> "config file"
> parameter
> 
> 
> 1.  There appears to be a problem with a minor part of 
> username map file
> interpretation.
> 
>      When I put an exclamation mark before a line in the 
> file, that is supposed
>      to stop any further mapping if a match has already been made.
>      That's what I understand to be the case.
>      This is not happening for me.
> 
>      When I connect from a Win2k machine as Administrator, 
> the log file
>      records the mapping from Administrator to smbadmin,
>      then instead of stopping after the ! exclamation point line,
>      it continues on and maps with the  wildcard mapping.
> 
>      Can anyone else verify this behaviour for me.
> 
>      Below is a sample of my username map file and
>      the log file.
> 
>      username map file
>      smbadmin = administrator Administrator
>      nobody = user1
>      nobody = user2
>      nobody = user3
>      ...
>      !nobody = user99
> 
>      nobody = *
> 
>      ;The ! means to stop processing file after this line if 
> a match has already
>  been made.
>      ;Otherwise, process the next line...
> 
> 
>      samba log file
>      [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
>        Mapped user Administrator to smbadmin
>      [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
>        Mapped user smbadmin to nobody
> 
> 
> 2.  Samba tools not processing "config file"
> 
>      I use the "config file" parameter in my conf file 
> (allows me to use
> different
>      conf files depending on the server)
>      The problem is that  the Samba tools do not take this 
> line into account.
>      The two that I have noticed are testparm and smbstatus.
>      Testparm returns the default settings instead of my 
> settings for conf file.
>      smbstatus says it can't find the lock file, since the 
> config file tells it
>      where to find it (it looks in default location).
> 
> Not major concerns, but worth reporting I think.
> I'm not sure if other tools/processes don't 'traverse' the 
> "config file"
> parameter
> but it could be a problem.
> 
> Has this been a problem for anyone else?
> I know I could remove the config file param and put the file 
> in the standard
> location
> but this would muck up the current system.   :-(
> 
> Any comments welcome, about fixes / planned fixes or 
> experience with either of
> these
> problems.
> 
> thanks
> -peter.
> p.s.  using Samba 2.2.5, Win2k and Solaris 8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************************************
> Opinions contained in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect
> the opinions of the Queensland Department of Main Roads,
> Queensland Transport or National Transport Secretariat, or
> endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure.
> If you have received this electronic mail message in error,
> please immediately notify the sender and delete the message
> from your computer.
> ************************************************************
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
>

Yes Bernd, on closer reading, I can see that you are right.

So the only real problem I have is with the "config file"  parameter
not
being recognised by the samba tools.
This is not a problem with the core Samba code I guess, but with
peripherals.

Anyone else with the "config file " problem?


Thanks for correcting me Bernd

-peter.





To:   Peter A Bryant/EngServ/QMR/Au@qdot, samba@lists.samba.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: [Samba] Are these BUGS? anyone experienced either of these?

I think, your first problem is not a bug, because in the man page of
smb.conf the using of the "!" in the username map means that the
mapping is
stopped, when a mapping is done by the (current) line.
In your example, the mapping stops only when user99 was mapped.

So you have to put a "!" in every line except the last line.

Bernd
> -----Original Message-----
> From: peter.a.bryant@mainroads.qld.gov.au
> [mailto:peter.a.bryant@mainroads.qld.gov.au]
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 9:57 AM
> To: samba@lists.samba.org
> Subject: [Samba] Are these BUGS? anyone experienced either of these?
>
>
>
>
>
> I have experienced a couple of (minor) problems with Samba
>
> Thought I would report these and ask if they are known problems.
>
> 1. Problem with "!" in username map file
>
> 2. Samba tools e.g. smbstatus, testparm not accounting for
> "config file"
> parameter
>
>
> 1.  There appears to be a problem with a minor part of
> username map file
> interpretation.
>
>      When I put an exclamation mark before a line in the
> file, that is supposed
>      to stop any further mapping if a match has already been made.
>      That's what I understand to be the case.
>      This is not happening for me.
>
>      When I connect from a Win2k machine as Administrator,
> the log file
>      records the mapping from Administrator to smbadmin,
>      then instead of stopping after the ! exclamation point line,
>      it continues on and maps with the  wildcard mapping.
>
>      Can anyone else verify this behaviour for me.
>
>      Below is a sample of my username map file and
>      the log file.
>
>      username map file
>      smbadmin = administrator Administrator
>      nobody = user1
>      nobody = user2
>      nobody = user3
>      ...
>      !nobody = user99
>
>      nobody = *
>
>      ;The ! means to stop processing file after this line if
> a match has already
>  been made.
>      ;Otherwise, process the next line...
>
>
>      samba log file
>      [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
>        Mapped user Administrator to smbadmin
>      [2002/08/16 16:20:27, 3] lib/username.c:map_username(168)
>        Mapped user smbadmin to nobody
>
>
> 2.  Samba tools not processing "config file"
>
>      I use the "config file" parameter in my conf file
> (allows me to use
> different
>      conf files depending on the server)
>      The problem is that  the Samba tools do not take this
> line into account.
>      The two that I have noticed are testparm and smbstatus.
>      Testparm returns the default settings instead of my
> settings for conf file.
>      smbstatus says it can't find the lock file, since the
> config file tells it
>      where to find it (it looks in default location).
>
> Not major concerns, but worth reporting I think.
> I'm not sure if other tools/processes don't 'traverse' the
> "config file"
> parameter
> but it could be a problem.
>
> Has this been a problem for anyone else?
> I know I could remove the config file param and put the file
> in the standard
> location
> but this would muck up the current system.   :-(
>
> Any comments welcome, about fixes / planned fixes or
> experience with either of
> these
> problems.
>
> thanks
> -peter.
> p.s.  using Samba 2.2.5, Win2k and Solaris 8
>





************************************************************
Opinions contained in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect
the opinions of the Queensland Department of Main Roads,
Queensland Transport or National Transport Secretariat, or
endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure.
If you have received this electronic mail message in error,
please immediately notify the sender and delete the message
from your computer.
************************************************************