On 12/10/15 15:52, Rowland Penny wrote:> On 12/10/15 14:39, buhorojo wrote: >> On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >>>> >>>> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba >>>> configuration?. You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which >>>> users post here guess that which they wish to achieve? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a >>> DC is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems >>> don't appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample >>> smb.conf and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say >>> that you do not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. >>> It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, >>> are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? >>> >>> Rowland >>> >>> >> Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you >> determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking >> about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it [...]. >> >> Give up. >> >> > > Well no, you are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine, > but if it is 'very important to have it' , why are the only complaints > about it being in smb.conf. Nobody (as far as I am aware) has every > complained about messages in the logs saying 'server role' not found. > > Rowland > >What do you put in smb.conf for server role = if it is not a server? We volunteer 'not a server'. HTH
Rowland Penny
2015-Oct-12 15:07 UTC
[Samba] invalid value 'netbios backup domain controller'
On 12/10/15 15:50, buhorojo wrote:> On 12/10/15 15:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >> On 12/10/15 14:39, buhorojo wrote: >>> On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>>> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba >>>>> configuration?. You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which >>>>> users post here guess that which they wish to achieve? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a >>>> DC is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems >>>> don't appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample >>>> smb.conf and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say >>>> that you do not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. >>>> It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, >>>> are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? >>>> >>>> Rowland >>>> >>>> >>> Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you >>> determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking >>> about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it >>> [...]. >>> >>> Give up. >>> >>> >> >> Well no, you are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine, >> but if it is 'very important to have it' , why are the only >> complaints about it being in smb.conf. Nobody (as far as I am aware) >> has every complained about messages in the logs saying 'server role' >> not found. >> >> Rowland >> >> > What do you put in smb.conf for server role = if it is not a server? > We volunteer 'not a server'. > HTH > > > >Oh, now you are getting silly, go away little boy.
On 12/10/15 17:07, Rowland Penny wrote:> On 12/10/15 15:50, buhorojo wrote: >> On 12/10/15 15:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On 12/10/15 14:39, buhorojo wrote: >>>> On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>>>> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba >>>>>> configuration?. You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which >>>>>> users post here guess that which they wish to achieve? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a >>>>> DC is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems >>>>> don't appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample >>>>> smb.conf and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say >>>>> that you do not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. >>>>> It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet >>>>> changed, are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? >>>>> >>>>> Rowland >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you >>>> determine what type of server users who post to the list are >>>> talking about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to >>>> have it [...]. >>>> >>>> Give up. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Well no, you are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine, >>> but if it is 'very important to have it' , why are the only >>> complaints about it being in smb.conf. Nobody (as far as I am aware) >>> has every complained about messages in the logs saying 'server role' >>> not found. >>> >>> Rowland >>> >>> >> What do you put in smb.conf for server role = if it is not a server? >> We volunteer 'not a server'. >> HTH >> >> >> >> > > Oh, now you are getting silly, go away little boy. >It was meant to help. Any serious replies perhaps?