search for: 11162

> not sure, but the colon in xattr names is probably not handled > correctly at this point. Can you please file a bugreport so we can > track this? Bug 11162 https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11162 -- HAT

Thank you! Does it possible to convert this git diffs - https://attachments.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=11162 to common patch? I would like to apply it to Sernet packages sources and rebuild it for test. On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:05 PM, mourik jan heupink <heupink at merit.unu.edu> wrote: > Perhaps this: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11061 > > > On 6/17/2015 16:4...

Hi, >> not sure, but the colon in xattr names is probably not handled >> correctly at this point. Can you please file a bugreport so we can >> track this? > > Bug 11162 > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11162 I tested samba 4.3.1 on Fedora 23 and rawhide. The colon problem is not corrected yet. $ getfattr Mew.txt # file: Mew.txt user.com.apple.TextEncoding user.com.apple.metadatakMDItemFinderComment $ rpm -qi samba Name : samba Epoch...

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 01:14:25AM +0900, HAT wrote: > Hi, > > >> not sure, but the colon in xattr names is probably not handled > >> correctly at this point. Can you please file a bugreport so we can > >> track this? > > > > Bug 11162 > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11162 > > I tested samba 4.3.1 on Fedora 23 and rawhide. > The colon problem is not corrected yet. > > $ getfattr Mew.txt > # file: Mew.txt > user.com.apple.TextEncoding > user.com.apple.metadatakMDItemFinderComment &gt...

...000 r--s 00000000 08:06 83813 /usr/lib64/samba/valid.dat 7f24dc4a7000-7f24dc4a9000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 7f24dc4a9000-7f24dc4aa000 r--p 0001b000 08:06 144 /lib64/ld-2.10.1.so 7f24dc4aa000-7f24dc4ab000 rw-p 0001c000 08:06 144 /lib64/ld-2.10.1.so 7f24dc4ab000-7f24dca92000 r-xp 00000000 08:06 11162 /usr/sbin/winbindd 7f24dcc92000-7f24dcca3000 r--p 005e7000 08:06 11162 /usr/sbin/winbindd 7f24dcca3000-7f24dccad000 rw-p 005f8000 08:06 11162 /usr/sbin/winbindd 7f24dccad000-7f24dccae000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 7f24de095000-7f24de237000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [heap] 7fffe086d000-7fffe08820...

Hi. I'm testing samba 4.2.0 vfs_fruit on Fedora Server 22-alpha. I confirmed that ResourceFork and FinderInfo are compatible with Netatalk 3.1.7. However, EAs are incompatible. The character ":" in EA name is wrong. The EAs are not seen from clients. smb.conf: [test2] path = /export/test2 writable = yes vfs objects = catia fruit streams_xattr fruit:locking =

On 12/28/2016 05:11 AM, Todor Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote: >> Which is why I wonder if there is some different config for the C7.3 version >> of apache. >> >> Or something with the C7-arm build... > Can you check for SELinux warnings/errors in /var/log/audit/audit.log? Good advice. As I

...u:object_r:httpd_user_content_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0 I ran into the same problem, I think. I ran "audit2why" and passed in the AVC. It suggested a pair of booleans I've never seen before. # audit2why type=AVC msg=audit(1483077583.703:1539671): avc: denied { read } for pid=11162 comm="httpd" name="courier-pythonfilter" dev="dm-0" ino=533228 scontext=system_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:httpd_user_content_t:s0 tclass=dir Was caused by: One of the following booleans was set incorrectly. Description: Allow...

......... = 25848 -log file tail offset ..... = 16468 -log file head offset ..... = 16468 +log file tail offset ..... = 16828 +log file head offset ..... = 16828 - - sync_mtime . = 2012-08-30 19:38:05 + - sync_mtime . = 2012-08-30 20:09:23 - - dirty_flag . = 1 + - dirty_flag . = 0 - - highest_modseq = 11162 + - highest_modseq = 11163 - - log_offset ... = 16468 + - log_offset ... = 16828 CACHE: -used_file_size ....... = 6385696 +used_file_size ....... = 6392132 RECORD: seq=25663, uid=25835, flags=0x00 - - ext 0 keywords : (0000) - - ext 1 modseq : 11156 (942b000000000000) + - ext...

Hi everyone, I''m currently finishing the planning phase of a small project I want to create. I read a bunch of tutorials about ActiveRecord and the different way to link your "tables" with belongs_to, has_many, has_and_belong_..., etc... However I''m stillnot sure if what I''m trying to do will work *well* with ActiveRecord. So enough talk,

Hello! This is my first Samba experience. Pre-condition: 1. Ubuntu 14.04 with updates installed 2. Samba 4.2.2 from Sernet repo 3. Pure Windows 2012 R2 server Both Linux and Windows are fresh systems, no antivirus on Windows, no firewall on Linux. AD was provisioned by https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_AD_DC_HOWTO manual. sernet-samba-ad package installed, SAMBA_START_MODE="ad" in

...in.c:327 I'm also seeing some other errors, e.g. : > Sep 30 10:37:06 auth(default): Error: Master request 15820.607 not found > Sep 30 10:51:27 dovecot: Error: child 29959 (login) killed with signal 11 (core not dumped) (latest ip=134.225.1.46) > Sep 30 10:51:38 dovecot: Error: child 11162 (login) killed with signal 11 (core not dumped) (latest ip=134.225.1.46) > Sep 30 10:54:03 imap-login: Warning: Error sending handshake to auth server: Transport endpoint is not connected How do I get the login (presumably imap-login) processes to dump core (or do I need to insert gdbhelper)?...

...path = /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol/mediture.dom/scripts read only = No [sysvol] path = /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol read only = No [deploy] path = /usr/local/samba/var/deploy read only = No Example: [root at appdb03 ~]# wbinfo -r mikes 10513 11143 10516 11162 90000002 [root at qa503 ~]# wbinfo -r mikes 10513 90000002 [root at great02 ~]# wbinfo -r mikes 10513 90000002 Thanks, Arthur This e-mail and any attachments may contain CONFIDENTIAL information, including PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION. If you are not the intended recipient, any use or disclosur...

Hi, I am trying to get faster search results on our webmail client(Roundcube). Besides using Lucene for FTS are there other options? Would having all mails indexed give fast results? Currently the time it takes to search 25,000mails is 4mins. If indexed how much faster are we looking at? Really appreciate if someone could advise about this. Thanks Kevin

...10390 10400 10401 10413 10421 10429 10511 10709 10710 10711 10712 10713 10714 10715 10717 10719 10720 10728 10778 10779 10799 10800 10801 10819 10823 10829 10830 10850 10853 10857 10859 10861 10863 10874 10883 10884 10916 10932 11009 11010 11011 11083 11084 11089 11100 11118 11121 11147 11148 11161 11162 11163 11168 11171 11226 11228 11229 11255 11342 11359 11369 11375 11378 11461 11463 11464 11465 11466 11543 11548 11549 11552 11557 11558 11559 11673 11704 11721 11756 11812 11826 11827 11828 11829 11830 11832 11836 11838 11840 11841 11843 11844 11867 11868 11871 11872 11876 11885 11892 11985 11988...

...413 10421 10429 > 10511 10709 10710 10711 10712 10713 10714 10715 10717 10719 10720 10728 > 10778 10779 10799 10800 10801 10819 10823 10829 10830 10850 10853 10857 > 10859 10861 10863 10874 10883 10884 10916 10932 11009 11010 11011 11083 > 11084 11089 11100 11118 11121 11147 11148 11161 11162 11163 11168 11171 > 11226 11228 11229 11255 11342 11359 11369 11375 11378 11461 11463 11464 > 11465 11466 11543 11548 11549 11552 11557 11558 11559 11673 11704 11721 > 11756 11812 11826 11827 11828 11829 11830 11832 11836 11838 11840 11841 > 11843 11844 11867 11868 11871 11872 11876 118...

Hopefully this time ...