samba - Aug 2005 - Possible change to group behaviour from 3.0.14a-> 3.0.20?

Hello,

I may be missing something, but it seems that there has been a change
between 3.0.14a and 3.0.20 which means that a user's primary UNIX group
HAS to be mapped to a valid NT group (i.e. the primary UNIX group in the
LDAP DB has to have the sambagroupmapping attribute and a SID). Can
anyone confirm this as a new requirement or am I being a bit stupid? 

I'm using an LDAP backend with no IDmap or winbind.

-- 
Tom.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tom Crummey, Systems and Network Manager,   EMAIL: tom@ee.ucl.ac.uk
 Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,                  
 University College London,                  TEL: +44 (0)20 7679 3898   
 Torrington Place,                           FAX: +44 (0)20 7388 9325
 London, UK, WC1E 7JE.                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tom Crummey wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I may be missing something, but it seems that there has been 
> a change between 3.0.14a and 3.0.20 which means that a
> user's primary UNIX group HAS to be mapped to a valid NT group
> (i.e. the primary UNIX group in the LDAP DB has to have
> the sambagroupmapping attribute and a SID). Can
> anyone confirm this as a new requirement or am I being a 
> bit stupid?
> 
> I'm using an LDAP backend with no IDmap or winbind.
no one mentioned this to me as an design change.  But we are
constantly trying to improve that code area.  What exactly are
seeing in the logs?






cheers, jerry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDDcb3IR7qMdg1EfYRAjjeAKDXN6cLru04xTbPdaLnkVp+c9me3gCfYgoO
tCB4L9T7TqHEqjSbqTxxtpA=Je/a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

> I may be missing something, but it seems that there has been a change
> between 3.0.14a and 3.0.20 which means that a user's primary UNIX group
> HAS to be mapped to a valid NT group (i.e. the primary UNIX group in the
> LDAP DB has to have the sambagroupmapping attribute and a SID). Can
> anyone confirm this as a new requirement or am I being a bit stupid?
In my systems, I always noticed samba complaining if you didn't have the
users' primary group mapped, along with a note that "NT doesn't
like that".