search for: bellyaching

I'm working to setup Samba as a domain member to a Windows Server active directory, and I keep hitting road blocks. There's some real terminology hurdles in the wiki. In a nutshell, my problem is this: I setup a Windows 2012 Essentials ADS domain and I ended up with zartman.local for my "domain" in Windows. So, I've got a dns zone in windows server that is domain.local

I would say that workgroup = ZARTMAN should be right. Workgroups normally don't have dots in their name. Than you should also try: idmap config ZARTMAN:backend = ad idmap config ZARTMAN:schema_mode = rfc2307 idmap config ZARTMAN:range = 10000-99999 One more thing is that it's not recommended to have a .local domain realm. Have a look at this above glibc...

...e the Alpha. The 2.0.6 out of BSDi's box works sort of OK (it has some weird erratic problems with W2K clients, just like 2.0.6 on Red Hat 6.2 does.) I've never had these problems on 2.0.7 on Alpha or Dead Rat and the release notes for 2.0.7 indicate a half dozen W2K bugs fixed. So, stop bellyaching and just frigging install 2.0.7, right? Yeah, right. 2.0.7 configures and compiles just a pretty as a peach. NMBD starts and runs like a champ. SMBD starts and begins parsing smb.conf and gets to the printers ans starts this nonsense: [2001/03/29 19:08:03, 3] param/loadparm.c:lp_load(2805) pm...

This is a continuation of the thread about redhat vs centos and the thought of moving from centos due to redhats new business model. Forgive the length, but I had to share. I went ahead and downloaded the 5 year supported version of ubuntu server. You think centos/redhat is a bit tough or not polished? One day with ubuntu server and you will look at centos install and setup as a god! Where do