Dear List, First forgive me for my RTFM question yesterday about groups not appearing in the Windows usermanager (Karel Kulhav?, thanks for your reply). I did read the SAMBA HOWTO Collection but in a more 'vertical' way. This net groupmap thing must have passed my attention. I installed a prebuild version of Samba for redhat 8.0. Redhat however does not compile in ACL's in their kernel by default. So I had to recompile my kernel (2.4.24) with the necessary ACL support. The packages libacl-2.0.11-2, acl-2.0.11-2 and libacl-devel-2.0.11-2 where already installed. Only the kernel was lacking ACL support which is working fine right now. However when I do a "smbd -b | grep -i ACL" there seems to be no ACL support in my precompiled samba. This is why I decided to recompile my Samba source. I took the tarbal from samba.org and not the source RPM from RedHat and compile it with "make 2>&1 | tee make.out" after doing the configure below: ./configure --with-configdir=/etc/samba --with-privatedir=/etc/samba \ --with-lockdir=/var/lock/samba --with-logfilebase=/var/log/samba \ --with-piddir=/var/run/samba --with-swatdir=/usr/share/swat \ --with-ads --with-pam --with-quotas --with-sendfile-support \ --with-smbmount --with-syslog --with-utmp --with-winbind \ --with-ldapsam --with-ldap --with-acl-support --with-pam_smbpass Now I have the following questions: 1. The compilation process went without errors. But I got a couple of warnings (25), most of them concerning 'passing arg 1 of [function] from incompatible pointer type'. Is it possible that these warnings can cause unexpected behaviour when running samba? And if so what can I do to get rid of these warnings? 2. Can I assume that my e2fsprog and coreutils packages are already patched for ACL's because the ACL packages/libraries mentioned earlier in this mail were already installed? Can this be tested with just a cp or a mv of a directory or file with ACL's on it? 3. When I do a "./smbd -b | grep -i ACL" on my newly compiled smbd deamon I got "HAVE_SYS_ACL_H, HAVE_POSIX_ACLS". Does this mean ACL's are compiled in successfully? I'm a bit in doubt because when I look at the list under "--with Options: & Build Options:" a WITH_ACL is lacking. TIA, Erik Hoitinga web: http://users.skynet.be/fanzel
Dear List, First forgive me for my RTFM question yesterday about groups not appearing in the Windows usermanager (Karel Kulhav?, thanks for your reply). I did read the SAMBA HOWTO Collection but in a more 'vertical' way. This net groupmap thing must have passed my attention. I installed a prebuild version of Samba for redhat 8.0. Redhat however does not compile in ACL's in their kernel by default. So I had to recompile my kernel (2.4.24) with the necessary ACL support. The packages libacl-2.0.11-2, acl-2.0.11-2 and libacl-devel-2.0.11-2 where already installed. Only the kernel was lacking ACL support which is working fine right now. However when I do a "smbd -b | grep -i ACL" there seems to be no ACL support in my precompiled samba. This is why I decided to recompile my Samba source. I took the tarbal from samba.org and not the source RPM from RedHat and compile it with "make 2>&1 | tee make.out" after doing the configure below: ./configure --with-configdir=/etc/samba --with-privatedir=/etc/samba \ --with-lockdir=/var/lock/samba --with-logfilebase=/var/log/samba \ --with-piddir=/var/run/samba --with-swatdir=/usr/share/swat \ --with-ads --with-pam --with-quotas --with-sendfile-support \ --with-smbmount --with-syslog --with-utmp --with-winbind \ --with-ldapsam --with-ldap --with-acl-support --with-pam_smbpass Now I have the following questions: 1. The compilation process went without errors. But I got a couple of warnings (25), most of them concerning 'passing arg 1 of [function] from incompatible pointer type'. Is it possible that these warnings can cause unexpected behaviour when running samba? And if so what can I do to get rid of these warnings? 2. Can I assume that my e2fsprog and coreutils packages are already patched for ACL's because the ACL packages/libraries mentioned earlier in this mail were already installed? Can this be tested with just a cp or a mv of a directory or file with ACL's on it? 3. When I do a "./smbd -b | grep -i ACL" on my newly compiled smbd deamon I got "HAVE_SYS_ACL_H, HAVE_POSIX_ACLS". Does this mean ACL's are compiled in successfully? I'm a bit in doubt because when I look at the list under "--with Options: & Build Options:" a WITH_ACL is lacking. TIA, Erik Hoitinga web: http://users.skynet.be/fanzel