search for: fask

...c = 192.168.102.255 doing parameter client schannel = no doing parameter passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd '%u' doing parameter allow hosts = 127. 192.168.102. 192.168.1. doing parameter remote announce = 192.168.102.255 192.168.1.255 doing parameter local master = no doing parameter realm = fask.COM doing parameter workgroup = fask doing parameter os level = 33 doing parameter server signing = no doing parameter printcap name = cups doing parameter winbind separator = @ doing parameter winbind offline logon = yes doing parameter allow trusted domains = yes doing parameter add group script...

...rnet (this is free). > > Rowland Thank you, i had created the smb.conf with the gnome app and then (after uninstalling that app) with SWAT. Took the sample you pointed to and now the global section is: [global] log file = /var/log/samba/%U.%m.log read raw = no write raw = no realm = fask.COM netbios name = CCSOO server string = %h server workgroup = fask os level = 25 debug level = 1 security = ADS preferred master = no winbind separator = # max log size = 99 log level = 3 idmap config fask:range = 10000-99999 idmap config fask:backend = ad idmap config *:range = 2000...

...uilt. I was not able to build it as CentOS 7, as something in the older hardware broke the install. CentOS 6 built successfully, and the server was returned to service. I then loaded the drive in another server, and examined it. fsck reported both / and /boot were clean, but when I redid this with fask -c, to check for bad blocks, it found many multiply-claimed blocks. First question: anyone have an idea why it showed as clean, until I checked for bad blocks? Would that just be because I'd gracefully shut down the original server, and it mounted ok on the other server? Mounting it on /mnt,...

...build it as > CentOS 7, as something in the older hardware broke the install. CentOS 6 > built successfully, and the server was returned to service. > > I then loaded the drive in another server, and examined it. fsck reported > both / and /boot were clean, but when I redid this with fask -c, to check > for bad blocks, it found many multiply-claimed blocks. > > First question: anyone have an idea why it showed as clean, until I > checked for bad blocks? Would that just be because I'd gracefully shut > down the original server, and it mounted ok on the other server...