search for: dircetory

...s browseable = yes ; CHANGED FROM YES TO NO!! ; read only so as not to give ; people without an account write access. [mcba] comment = MCBA Accounting file space path = /disk2/mcba read only = no public = yes browseable = yes ;[gold] ; comment = ESC Master Dircetory ; path = /usr/gold ; create mode = 0777 ; read only = no ; public = yes ; writeable = yes ; browseable = yes [honddata] comment = ESC Data Dircetory path = /u/sghond create mode = 0777 read only = no public = yes writeable = yes browseable = yes...

...ight now. I need to know what should be correct for the sysvol so I can verify that this is correct, before the issue spreads. I feel the issue is a Windows bug, but I have to be sure before I go down that path. After resetting the ACLs I did notice that the UNIX permissions were 770 on the sysvol dircetory. Is that correct? Also, what information should I post and I will get it ASAP. Thanks in advance for any assistance you may offer. -- Reach Technology FP, Inc Lead IT/IS Specialist

Hi everybody, i try to install the R 1.0.1 on a mips-sgi-irix6.2 system. The configure seems ok : it ends with - souce directory : . - installation dircetory : /usr/local - C compiler : cc -g - Fortran compiler : fort77 - Gnome support : no But when i enter : make it says: -syntax error in file ../tools/jeywords2html at line 9, next 2 tokens "my $key" -syntax error in file ../tools/jeywords2html at line 55, next 2 tokens "searchKey(&quot...

Suddenly my samba printers ceased working. Trying to print 'manually' through smbclient yields this: smbclient \\\\host\\pcprinter -P -N -U guest Added interface ip=xxx.xyz.yy.zzz bcast=xxx.xyz.yy.255 nmask=255.255.255.0 Domain=[IPHY] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 2.2.1a] smb: \> print /etc/printcap putting file /etc/printcap as printcap-2385 Error writing file: ERRHRD - 39 (0 kb/s)

...what should be correct for the sysvol so I can > verify that this is correct, before the issue spreads. I feel the issue > is a Windows bug, but I have to be sure before I go down that path. > > After resetting the ACLs I did notice that the UNIX permissions were 770 > on the sysvol dircetory. Is that correct? Also, what information should > I post and I will get it ASAP. Thanks in advance for any assistance you > may offer. > -- Reach Technology FP, Inc Lead IT/IS Specialist

I have a question. I have installed the latest samba release from the source. My problem is that i can't seem to be able to set the hidden flag on the directories from windows. It does work fine with the files. This is what my share looks like. [Data] comment = Data Share path = /home/data/data valid users = valid users here public = no writable = yes printable = no map

I set up winbind on one box successfully. Now a friend told me that it might be better to use ActiveDirectoriy (the PDC and all other servers are win2000). What is the difference in both approaches? which is 'better'? I feel that ldap is the more general and cleaner solution. Is that true? My windows-admins will get rid of wins soon. does winbind rely on wins? can libnss-ldap also create

I've just released a snapshot of 2.0.6 in the alpha directory on samba.org. This is intended for testing to make sure some of the recent changes work well on a wider range of sites. I have also built a RedHat Linux 6.X RPM and put it in the same dircetory. If you are not running a mission critical site then we would appreciate feedback on this snapshot. If you have reported a bug in Samba and you have not yet confirmed that it is fixed then please test this snapshot and let us know if the bug is not fixed. Note that it is too late for new features...

Today I return to Ruby after 12 months. I find I have several installations, including Ruby 1.9!? Decided to rationlise things a bit before starting to learn Ruby again from scratch. Rails is hot stuff and I find I also had an old version of InstantRails (this is an XP machine... calm down now, it''s all I''ve got (well not quite, but I''ll come to that later)).

Please note that Windows 9x clients are not true members of a domain for reasons outlined in this article. Therefore the protocol for support Windows 9x style domain logons is completely different from NT4 domain logons and has been officially supported for some time. Did you read this document? Let me know what needs to be updated and i will take care of it. Cheers, jerry