similar to: Samba doesn't appear in browse list

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "Samba doesn't appear in browse list"

2004 Jan 21
2
winbind hang
All; I'm having an odd problem with winbind. I just installed Samba 3.0.2 pre1 on a Solaris 9 server. smbd/nmbd/winbindd all start ok. But when it first starts, if I try "wbinfo -u", it hangs. As does "getent passwd". This will continue for the first couple hours after a restart. Then, things will suddenly start to work, and be fine for the rest of the time. Until I have
2004 Jul 23
2
"Duplicate workgroup names in browse list" problem reappeared in 3.0.5
Starting from version 3.0.2 (or .3?) there were a misfeature that caused workgroup names to show up as duplicates in workstations' browse lists. Fix for this didn't reach into 3.0.5-pre1, but rc1 had this fixed. Today I upgraded 3.0.5-rc1 to 3.0.5-2 (FC2 binary rpm from samba.org) and the problem reappeared. To be more spesific, the problem appears when there are more that one workgroup
2016 Mar 06
3
Syslinux 6.04-pre1
... > nasm -f elf -Ox -g -F dwarf -DDATE_STR="''" \ > -DHEXDATE="0x56dc3c62" \ > -Di386 \ > -I/tmp/syslinux-6.04-pre1/core/ \ > -l ldlinux.lsr -o ldlinux.o -MP -MD ./.ldlinux.o.d /tmp/syslinux-6.04-pre1/core/ldlinux.asm > nasm -f elf -Ox -g -F dwarf -DDATE_STR="''" \ > -DHEXDATE="0x56dc3c62" \ > -Di386 \ >
2016 Mar 07
2
Syslinux 6.04-pre1
On 06.03.2016 18:23, poma wrote: > On 06.03.2016 16:47, poma wrote: >> ... >>> nasm -f elf -Ox -g -F dwarf -DDATE_STR="''" \ >>> -DHEXDATE="0x56dc3c62" \ >>> -Di386 \ >>> -I/tmp/syslinux-6.04-pre1/core/ \ >>> -l ldlinux.lsr -o ldlinux.o -MP -MD ./.ldlinux.o.d /tmp/syslinux-6.04-pre1/core/ldlinux.asm >>>
2014 Jun 11
3
Acceptable version mismatch between syslinux 6.0N's MBR/ldlinux.sys and *.c32?
Hi there, first, thanks a lot for syslinux! I'm aware that one can't mix syslinux 4's MBR + ldlinux.sys with syslinux 6's COM32R modules. Fair enough. Now, I need to know how strong this "versions *must* match" requirement is when dealing with different versions of syslinux 6.x. E.g. * MBR and ldlinux.sys installed by syslinux 6.03-pre1 * all *.c32 modules
2003 Oct 31
1
samba3 and CUPS: lpoptions does not work
Hi, I have set up a CUPS queue in the samba server with specific lpoptions (actually, it's a queue to print 2-up on an HP LaserJet4300 printer. I used lpoptions -d NX2-118 -o number-up=2). Everything works as expected when I print from the Unix side. However, when I print to the corresponding samba queue, the options specified through lpoptions are ignored (i.e. the prints come out as 1-up
2016 Oct 26
2
[PATCH] Fix for crash with certain EFIs
> >> Let me double check what the status of 6.04-pre1 is. Maybe this patch > >> is not necessary at all! > > OK, I have verified beyond doubt that 6.04-pre1 (prebuilt from > kernel.org) indeed does fix the issue on the affected systems. > > Again, sorry for the churn! > > Best Regards, > - Chris OK, so, from the user's point of view, the
2018 Dec 03
2
fixing debian's hd-media image
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 9:29 PM Ady Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > > > > > _ target/EFI/BOOT/SYSLINUX.CFG > > > > I don't think that exists? (see list below) > > > In our "first test" (simple boot prompt), we created > "target/EFI/BOOT/SYSLINUX.CFG". In our "second test" we _added_ >
2003 Dec 06
1
recode{car} does not work as expected?
Hi to all, I am having a problem when using recode from the car package. I have a variable that is char and when I use recode to create a new variable that is supposed to be numeric I get a factor variable. Here is the code I am using: > FCI$PRE1 <- recode (PRE1RES, " c('C', 'c')=1 ; else = 0 ; as.factor.result=FALSE ") So, if I understand correctly the recode
2016 Oct 20
2
[PATCH] Fix for crash with certain EFIs
> Thank you all. > > It looks like -mno-red-zone flag is already in master branch since > commit 7d70885d, but it seems it is applied to all EFI builds. Finally we are on the same page. > > IIUC, the problem only affects efi64 builds. Have you actually tested efi32 (ia32) builds? > > So here's the modification of my patch to only apply -mno-red-zone >
2016 Oct 20
2
[PATCH] Fix for crash with certain EFIs
> Let me double check what the status of 6.04-pre1 is. Maybe this patch > is not necessary at all! Just a reminder: _ 6.04-pre1 can be downloaded from kernel.org, and it includes pre-built binaries, so no "make" anything is needed (and to some degree, not always recommended). _ In many cases, testing with pre-built official binaries is desired, so others can attempt to
2008 Apr 02
1
Network UPS Tools version 2.2.2-pre1 released
Network UPS Tools version 2.2.2-pre1 has been released. http://www.networkupstools.org/ Direct access: - Download: http://www.networkupstools.org/source/2.2/testing/nut-2.2.2-pre1.tar.gz - News: http://www.networkupstools.org/source/2.2/testing/new-2.2.2-pre1.txt - ChangeLog: http://www.networkupstools.org/source/2.2/testing/ChangeLog Arnaud and the NUT team -- Linux / Unix Expert R&D -
2013 Jul 18
3
Efi64 boot fail during download from kernel and initrd via http
On Sat, 13 Jul, at 07:58:21PM, Michael Szerencsits wrote: > I use VMWare Player 5.02 build 1031769 on Win2k8 R2 64bit. > I found that the last working version is 6.02-pre1 but beginning > with pre2 and also latest version 6.02-pre5 it fail to boot. Are you sure that 6.02-pre1 worked? There was only one commit between 6.02-pre1 and 6.02-pre2 and it shouldn't have affected anything at
2006 Sep 02
1
About menu.c32 from SYSLINUX 3.30-pre1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 When I tried to use the menu.c32 from SYSLINUX 3.30-pre1, the simple menu have different background color than that in 3.20. 1. use the menu.c32 from SYSLINUX 3.30-pre1, the simple menu is: http://lfod.nchc.org.tw/stick/syslinux/syslinux_menu_3.30_pre1.jpg 2. use the menu.c32 from SYSLINUX 3.20, the simple menu is:
2010 Mar 11
1
Recovery console doesn't work in chain.c32 3.85 or 3.86-pre1
The Windows recovery console doesn't work with chain.c32 3.85 or 3.86-pre1. COM32 chain.c32 APPEND cmldr=/cmldr Initially reported by cdob at: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10487#entry94001 It did work fine with the: "chain.c32: Handle nonlinear logical partitions" patch. The following patch broke the recovery console hack: chain.c32: add option to set hidden
2016 Mar 05
2
build problems with 6.04-pre1
hello everybody, apologies if I'm missing something here Just tried to build 6.04-pre1 test version with: make bios installer and found some problems all (seemingly) related to inaccurate paths in various Makefiles. I enclose a complete patch at the end of this email, which details the problems I found and how they got fixed for me. As an example, this is the first error I got:
2013 Jun 26
1
Syslinux 6.00 released
On 26.06.2013 06:38, Helmut Hullen wrote: > Hallo, Matt, > > Du meintest am 25.06.13: > >>> Not really... let's just document "make bios". > >> There's preliminary documentation in doc/building.txt. > > And "make bios" has run without any problem on my machine. ? CFLAGS=-Werror make bios ? /tmp/syslinux-6.01-pre1/core/bios.c: In
2013 Jul 08
3
[5.xx-6.01] broken PXE with HTTP
On 07/05/2013 01:02 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote: > > 5.00 [pxelinux.0] OK 5.01 [pxelinux.0] OK 5.02-pre1 > [pxelinux.0] OK 5.02-pre2 [pxelinux.0] OK 5.02-pre3 [pxelinux.0] > BAD (freeze, no error messages, 100% CPU used) > > 5.10-pre1 [pxelinux.0] BAD (freeze, no error messages, 100% CPU > used) 5.10-pre2 [pxelinux.0] BAD (Failed to load: ldlinux.c32,
2019 Jun 08
2
PXELINUX gets stuck when receiving non-PXE traffic
On 6/6/19 8:16 AM, Ady Ady via Syslinux wrote: > >> the PXELINUX log line is >> printed (PXELINUX 6.04 lwIP 6.04-pre3 Copyright (C) 1994-2015 H. Peter >> Anvin et al), > > (snip) > > FWIW, the official binaries from 6.04-pre2 and 6.04-pre3 are not good > for troubleshooting. > > Is the same behavior present when testing with other versions? I would
2020 Jul 23
2
extlinux - Failed to load ldlinux.c32
Thank you for your answer. I need to correct some information from my previous post: booting from `/` did not work either. I just assumed it did based on previous experience. But with that successful build on development branch, it did not either. > I would suggest trying first the official binaries that are already > included in the official distribution archive (6.03-pre1). Let me