samba - Oct 2009 - One Question .. the question... nobody don´t have answer ..

Hello

Somebody have idea which user account is responsible of guest info ?  There
is any box linux with openldap and samba integrated ?

Thanks .. .

[2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] smbd/server.c:main(942)
  smbd version 3.0.34 started.
  Copyright Andrew Tridgell and the Samba Team 1992-2009
[2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] param/loadparm.c:set_server_role(4293)
  Server's Role (logon server) conflicts with share-level security
[2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] services/services_db.c:svcctl_init_keys(420)
  svcctl_init_keys: key lookup failed! (WERR_ACCESS_DENIED)
[2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] smbd/server.c:main(1057)
  ERROR: failed to setup guest info.


-- 
Bruno Steven - Administrador de sistemas.
LPIC-1 - LPI ID: lpi000119659 / Code: p2e4wz47e4
https://www.lpi.org/caf/Xamman/certification

MCP-Windows 2003 - TranscriptID: 793804 / Access Code: 080089100
https://mcp.microsoft.com/authenticate/validatemcp.aspx

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:03:40PM -0300, Bruno Steven
wrote:
> Hello
> 
> Somebody have idea which user account is responsible of guest info ?  There
> is any box linux with openldap and samba integrated ?
> 
> Thanks .. .
> 
> [2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] smbd/server.c:main(942)
>   smbd version 3.0.34 started.
>   Copyright Andrew Tridgell and the Samba Team 1992-2009
> [2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] param/loadparm.c:set_server_role(4293)
>   Server's Role (logon server) conflicts with share-level security
> [2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] services/services_db.c:svcctl_init_keys(420)
>   svcctl_init_keys: key lookup failed! (WERR_ACCESS_DENIED)
> [2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] smbd/server.c:main(1057)
>   ERROR: failed to setup guest info.
You can't have "security = share" with "domain logons =
yes",
it makes no sense. Fix that first.

Jeremy.

If I were you, I would look at this problem first:
> [2009/10/14 18:38:11, 0] param/loadparm.c:set_server_role(4293)
>   Server's Role (logon server) conflicts with share-level security
>   
You have told your server to behave as a Domain Controller and yet at 
the same time you tell it to use share-level security?