Displaying 20 results from an estimated 50000 matches similar to: "No subject"
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
share in the samba box, from the PDC server itself. The log.winbindd and
log.nmbd are empty.
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(865)
Domain=[EERDBR001] NativeOS=[Windows NT 1381] NativeLanMan=[] [2001/08/08
13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(876)
sesssetupX:name=[administrator]
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] libsmb/namequery.c:resolve_lmhosts(733)
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
for this process is "root", that is correct. The PID 7247 is one of the
users, but the UID shouldn't be "root" and should be the username that was
authenticated during logon.
Anyone have same or similar problem? and how do I prevent this problem
from happening again? I would appreciate any help.
Thanks.
Will Sun
wsun@jpl.nasa.gov
(818) 354-2311
Return-Path:
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
cheers, jerry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
www.valinux.com VA Linux Systems gcarter_at_valinux.com
www.samba.org SAMBA Team jerry_at_samba.org
www.plainjoe.org jerry_at_plainjoe.org
--"I never saved anything for the swim back." Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
Return-Path:
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
have a hosts allow or hosts deny line in your smb.conf. If you don't
want samba to do reverse lookups, then comment out any allow/deny hosts
lines in your smb.conf file.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: future@yxtc.edu.cn [mailto:future@yxtc.edu.cn]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 3:00 AM
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Subject: dns and samba
Hi,
I find that my samba server always does
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
read list (S)
This is a list of users that are given read-only
access to a service. If the connecting user is in
this list then they will not be given write access,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
no matter what the writeable option is set to. The
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
share in the samba box, from the PDC server itself. The log.winbindd and
log.nmbd are empty.
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(865)
Domain=[EERDBR001] NativeOS=[Windows NT 1381] NativeLanMan=[]
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(876)
sesssetupX:name=[administrator]
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] libsmb/namequery.c:resolve_lmhosts(733)
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
share in the samba box, from the PDC server itself. The log.winbindd and
log.nmbd are empty.
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(865)
Domain=[EERDBR001] NativeOS=[Windows NT 1381] NativeLanMan=[] [2001/08/08
13:11:28, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(876)
sesssetupX:name=[administrator]
[2001/08/08 13:11:28, 3] libsmb/namequery.c:resolve_lmhosts(733)
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
copy d:\bugs.ps \\ouessant\lexmark
after having deleted all the samba log files and restarted the SMBd daemon from the SWAT Web interface.
This leads to the INTERNAL ERROR, see samba.oulx
Now, to locate the problem, I tried the same kind of command on the same file, bugs.ps, but using the SMBCLIENT application from the Linux server itself, without changing anything, nor restarting the SMBd
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
When I try the command
nmblookup -M TESTGROUP
querying TESTGROUP on 192.168.255.255
name_query failed to find name TESTGROUP #1d
My /etc/hosts file is
# Do not remove the following line, or various programs
# that require network functionality will fail.
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
192.168.100.101 testpc
192.168.100.100 linuxserver
/etc/samba/lmhosts is
127.0.0.1 localhost
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
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
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
and that access to the client should be denied.
> James
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alexander Lobodzinski" <lobo@mental.com>
> To: <samba@lists.samba.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 10:17 AM
> Subject: Can I have only certain users log in to a Samba DC client?
>
>
> > A machine should be member of a domain controlled by
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
why the install is failing. Do in need to rpm -e on all the 2.07
packages???
Return-Path: <nikolaus@erlm.siemens.de>
Delivered-To: samba@lists.samba.org
Received: from atlantis.erlm.siemens.de (atlantis.erlm.siemens.de
[212.114.202.14]) by lists.samba.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B884C4278
for <samba@lists.samba.org>; Sun, 27 May 2001 22:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
is turned on. Can anybody
kind to confirm with me?
Our network is using a mix of Win2k server, Win2k Pro, Win98, Win95 and
WinMe machines, where the
Win2k server is the domain controller and terminal service applications
server and the Samba is a member
fileserver of the domain. All workstations logon and mount the samba file
services.
We'd like to check if the problem could be solved by
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
However....
When I try the command
nmblookup -M TESTGROUP
querying TESTGROUP on 192.168.255.255
name_query failed to find name TESTGROUP #1d
My /etc/hosts file is
# Do not remove the following line, or various programs
# that require network functionality will fail.
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
192.168.100.101 testpc
192.168.100.100 linuxserver
/etc/samba/lmhosts is
127.0.0.1
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
When I run smbclient
1. smbclient //LINUX01//homes -U test
password is requested, I enter the password, and I get in
2. smbclient //LINUX01//homes -U Jane
password is requested, I enter the password, and I cannot
get in
(ERRSV - ERRbadpw (Bad Password - name/password pair in a
Tree Connect
or Session Setup are invalid)
3. smbclient
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
Are you using wins?
Try lmhosts for the start?
Are all machines on the same subnet?
Just a few hints to start with ...
Christian
>
>
> I have absolutely no clue what I could do to fix it. The only solution I
> can think of, is to downgrade to redhat 6.2.
>
> Your help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Stefan Kaes
>
> portax.com GmbH
> Zielstattstrasse 40, Geb.
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
Is there another way of doing the bindings so that the Windows share doesn't run on TCP/IP but will still work with SAMBA? If so, where in the docs should I be looking, and if not - maybe this should be something discussed by the SAMBA dev people..
Regards,
Marc.
Return-Path: <twunder@iwmail.com>
Delivered-To: samba@lists.samba.org
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
remove unix password sync = yes
Reply on a question....
http://www.mail-archive.com/redhat-devel-list@redhat.com/msg04223.html
Good Luck,
Ries
Return-Path: <ries@franksintl.nl>
Delivered-To: samba@lists.samba.org
Received: from tiny.int.franksintl.nl (goblin.franksintl.nl
[195.193.231.154]) by lists.samba.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id
6771C4AC8 for <samba@lists.samba.org>; Thu, 17
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
Are you using wins?
Try lmhosts for the start?
Are all machines on the same subnet?
Just a few hints to start with ...
Christian
>
>
> I have absolutely no clue what I could do to fix it. The only solution I
> can think of, is to downgrade to redhat 6.2.
>
> Your help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Stefan Kaes
>
> portax.com GmbH
> Zielstattstrasse 40,
2003 Dec 01
0
No subject
... (port 138, setting options)...
[2001/07/10 20:11:23, 3] nmbd/nmbd.c:(541)
open_sockets: Broadcast sockets opened.
[2001/07/10 20:11:23, 2] lib/interface.c:(85)
added interface ip=141.43.132.161 bcast=141.43.132.191 nmask=255.255.255.192
[2001/07/10 20:11:23, 3] lib/util_sock.c:(832)
bind succeeded on port 137
... (port 138, setting options)...
[2001/07/10 20:11:23, 2]