samba - Sep 2016 - Failed to issue the StartTLS instruction - yet ldap ssl = no is set

On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:58:00 +0200
Reindl Harald via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 14.09.2016 um 16:43 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba:
> > You posted:
> >
> >  it has something to do with:
> >    ;root directory > >    ;lock directory > >    ;state
directory > >    ;cache directory > >
> > The ';' turns off the lines and the defaults will be used, but
if
> > you remove the ';', then all those directory will be set to
NONE,
> > i.e. they will not be used
> 
> no he posted originally that below an statet with comment it out
> things are working
> 
> I'm trying:
> 
>    root directory = /var/lib/samba-second
>    lock directory = /var/lib/samba-second
>    state directory = /var/lib/samba-second
>    cache directory = /var/lib/samba-second
> 
Good point, but why not post it as your second version, but with ';' in
front of the lines ?

It may be that it isn't a Samba problem, I have seen similar problems
with selinux or apparmor denying access.

He still hasn't said why he wants to run Samba twice on the same
machine, or how he is trying to do this.

Rowland

Rowland,
nothing here is meant to be personal, but.. why so hasty? 
Why such a rush?

On 14/09/16 16:15, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> Good point, but why not post it as your second version, but with
';' in
> front of the lines ?
just take a moment to read ... thoroughly
> It may be that it isn't a Samba problem, I have seen similar problems
> with selinux or apparmor denying access.
nope, in permissive mode
> He still hasn't said why he wants to run Samba twice on the same
> machine, or how he is trying to do this.
I also said:
".. At this moment only this one instance of Samba is 
running..."
and:
".. Well, two instances would be a solution, workaround to 
another problem I ran into, more difficult to overcome. But 
that is not the issue to which I seek help here..."
so again, at this moment only one instance.

I really think it should be easy to reproduce - just use 
above directives, and to get warnings about dbwrap_watchers.tdb
use ldap backend to passdb, then no matter with ssl or 
without - fails as in the thread subject:

non-standard bit in smb.conf:

  root directory = /var/lib/samba-second
   lock directory = /var/lib/samba-second
   state directory = /var/lib/samba-second
   cache directory = /var/lib/samba-second
   private dir = /var/lib/samba-second/private
   ncalrpc dir = /run/samba-second/ncalrpc
   ntp signd socket directory = /var/lib/samba-second/ntp_signd
   winbindd socket directory = /run/samba-second/winbindd-second
   winbindd privileged socket directory = 
/var/lib/samba-second/winbindd_privileged-second
   pid directory = /run/samba-second

many thanks

On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 17:30:59 +0100
lejeczek via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Rowland,
> nothing here is meant to be personal, but.. why so hasty? 
> Why such a rush?
There is nothing personal on my part, I am just trying to find out why
you need to run Samba twice.

If you really need to run Samba twice on the same host, you will
probably be better off compiling Samba yourself, this way you could
put one instance in /usr/local/samba and the other in /usr/local/samba2

Then set both instances of samba up separately.

However, it would probably be easier to set the second Samba up in a
VM running on the host that the first is running on.

Or to put it another way, unless you tell us just what you are doing,
how can anybody offer you credible help.

Rowland