We have a Linux user and group with the same name (username prox, group name prox) and a Samba share with "force user = prox" set. Since upgrading from Samba 3.0.21b to Samba 3.0.23a, that share no longer works. smbclient gives the following error when connecting to the share: tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_NO_SUCH_USER The Samba server logs the following error: [2006/08/07 09:38:26, 1] auth/auth_util.c:create_token_from_username(1060) prox is a Domain Group, not a user So Samba no longer likes having a user and group by the same name. Is this an intentional change in Samba 3.0.23, or is it a bug? I don't remember seeing anything about it in the release notes. Josh Kelley
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Josh,> We have a Linux user and group with the same name > (username prox, group name prox) and a Samba share > with "force user = prox" set. Since upgrading from Samba > 3.0.21b to Samba 3.0.23a, that share no longer works. > smbclient gives the following error when connecting to > the share: > > tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_NO_SUCH_USER > > The Samba server logs the following error: > > [2006/08/07 09:38:26, 1] auth/auth_util.c:create_token_from_username(1060) > prox is a Domain Group, not a user > > So Samba no longer likes having a user and group > by the same name. Is this an intentional change > in Samba 3.0.23, or is it a bug? I don't > remember seeing anything about it in the release > notes.We think that we have this fixed in the current SAMBA_3_0_RELEASE. Would you mind testing this and letting me know? You can grab it from svn://svnanon.samba.org/samba/branches/SAMBA_3_0_RELEASE or rsync;//rsync.samba.org/ftp/unpacked/samba_3_0_release. I'll hold 3.0.23b until I hear from you. Thanks. cheers, jerry ====================================================================Samba ------- http://www.samba.org Centeris ----------- http://www.centeris.com "What man is a man who does not make the world better?" --Balian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE11PrIR7qMdg1EfYRAjBmAKDkFM5/L1fdGKy97rbzky0y4cvb6gCgtkgM P2F5fJqC/zMD1Ye/lJ355mU=Y8l/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ok, understand :) i just wanted to find out the way samba would solve this issue if there?s a user and a group with the same name. if i?d ever face this problem, i would rename either of them. thx! micha Volker Lendecke wrote:> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:02:24AM +0200, Michael Gasch wrote: >> well, this was kind of mind game: >> i have a samba PDC with a group test and a user test. this works fine >> for the DC (tested). how would samba on a member solve this issue, if >> smbclient connects (no windows involved)? > > Sorry to say it, but if you definitely need this, then the > Windows authentication protocol is not what you can use. > You will need to find other mechanisms like ldap to > authenticate/authorize your users. > > Volker-- Michael Gasch Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Department of Human Evolution (IT Staff) Deutscher Platz 6 D-04103 Leipzig Germany Phone: 49 (0)341 - 3550 137 49 (0)341 - 3550 374 Fax: 49 (0)341 - 3550 399