Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "unperson".
Did you mean:
inperson
2018 Jan 16
2
idmap limit?
Hi,
no, that's my fault. I changed the UIDs and user names in my "ls -l" to
unpersonalized/example data for my mail and didn't think about putting
these values into the range. A better unpersonalized data example would
look like:
----------
drwx------ 43 DOM\user1 DOM\group 4096 Jan 10 08:00 user1
drwx------ 5 DOM\user2 DOM\group 4096 Jan 11 08:13 user2
dr...
2018 Jan 16
0
idmap limit?
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:20:52 +0100
Andreas Hauffe via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> no, that's my fault. I changed the UIDs and user names in my "ls -l"
> to unpersonalized/example data for my mail and didn't think about
> putting these values into the range. A better unpersonalized data
> example would look like:
>
> ----------
>
> drwx------ 43 DOM\user1 DOM\group 4096 Jan 10 08:00 user1
> drwx------ 5 DOM\user2 DOM\...
2018 Jan 16
2
idmap limit?
...Am 16.01.2018 um 16:38 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:20:52 +0100
> Andreas Hauffe via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> no, that's my fault. I changed the UIDs and user names in my "ls -l"
>> to unpersonalized/example data for my mail and didn't think about
>> putting these values into the range. A better unpersonalized data
>> example would look like:
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> drwx------ 43 DOM\user1 DOM\group 4096 Jan 10 08:00 user1
>> drwx------...
2018 Jan 16
2
idmap limit?
Hi,
we are running a file server as member server of a windows 2012 domain.
Now we are facing the problem, that some UIDs are not mapped to the user
names by the running winbindd process. This results in "nobody"
usernames for nfs shares mounted by other clients.
When doing an "ls -l" in the homes directory on the member server (file
server), the list looks like: