similar to: Samba 3.0.5: Odd browsing / login issues

I''ve just started using CentOS as an alternative OS for some servers for a project. At the time 3.4 was the release of choice. I''m curious how long the CentOS project will release fixes and patched rpms for 3.4 before it would be necessary to migrate these machines to 4.x. I rather know in advance so I can plan accordingly and slowly migrate these over time. I do realize that 4.x

This is not really a Samba problem, but it does relate to Samba, in a fashion... In regards to: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/?url=/technet/security/bulleti n/MS04-004.asp Since the latest security patch from Microsoft (last Thursday?) was applied to common desktop machines within our school we have been suffering from problems with network connections. We run several Mac OS X

> When trying to connect to a samba PDC I receive this error of wrong > network password. I've checked samba root's password, machine > account, user account and so but nothing seems to work. the other > day I go into the domain without a problem, now I cannot do that > ( I've change quite a lot parameters in /etc/samba/smb.conf ). Can > someone guide me in some

On 2/7/2017 20:02, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > ... > > My understanding is that BNDCU is the cheapest possible instruction, > just like XOR or ADD, > so the overhead should be relatively small. > Still my guesstimate would be >= 5% since stores are very numerous. > And such overhead will be on top of whatever overhead SafeStack has. > Do you have any measurements to

I just switched gcc from 4.6.2 to 4.7.1 and see the massive amount of warnings, see few examples below. They mostly didn't exist with gcc-4.6.2. rev.159224 Yuri /usr/home/yuri/llvm-2012-06/latest-unpatched/llvm-fix/include/llvm/ADT/PointerUnion.h:56:10: warning: enumeral mismatch in conditional expression:

-Wenum-compare is buggy / bogus. We should turn this warning off in our build scripts if possible. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote: > I just switched gcc from 4.6.2 to 4.7.1 and see the massive amount of > warnings, see few examples below. > They mostly didn't exist with gcc-4.6.2. > > rev.159224 > > Yuri > > >

I had this problem too. The documentation for the winMenus says that these functions are part of the utils package. R must be loading this library after it sources in Rprofile. If you add library(utils) to the beginning of your .First function, it should take care of the problem. Brian Gregor, P.E. Transportation Planning Analysis Unit Oregon Department of Transportation Brian.J.GREGOR at

Hi! I would like some advices to combine security and automated backup... How rsync manage hosts allow parameter compared to /etc/hosts.allow? Is it possible to use ssh key just for authentification not for crypted transfert? I have also a problem to preserve owner:group properties even with archive parameter which is supposed to do that. I have to put gid =root and uid = root in

Hi, We have been planning to upgrad rsync 3.0.5. I have some question on this so that we will not screwed up the file systems. We have been using rsync 2.6.7 since long and we didn't have any major problems. I am wondering if we upgrade rsync 3.0.5 then will it cause any unexpected behaviour then rsync 2.6.7? Can we directly upgrade it without any problems? It would be nice if someone suggest

Hi, Here is the refreshed version of the multi-page ring patch for blkfront and blkback. I currently don''t have time to refresh the blktap part of the patch. The patch should apply cleanly to the following changeset in the linux 2.6.18 tree: changeset: 752:0b859c9516ba tag: qparent parent: 751:6591b4869889 parent: 748:5012c470f875 user: Keir Fraser

hi, may i ask some stupid question. :) I am using Samba 2.2.8a, how should i do if i don't want upgrade to the = latest version of Samba but use the *.patch file? And there are so many patch files, should i patch every file to my = system? If the affected release of a patch file is "3.0.x <=3D 3.0.6", dose it = mean this security issue just affect version 3.0.x and my system

Suppose I have a CentOS 5.7 machine running the default Apache with no extra modules enabled, and with the "yum-updatesd" service running to pull down and install updates as soon as they become available from the repository. (Assume further the password is strong, etc.) On the other hand, suppose that as the admin, I'm not subscribed to any security alert mailing lists which send

Full_Name: John Garvin Version: 1.9.0 OS: OSF1 Alpha ev6 Submission from: (NULL) (128.42.129.78) I configured R 1.9.0 with --enable-R-shlib on Alpha. 'make check' fails with an unresolved symbol. Here's the relevant output: running code in 'reg-tests-1.R' ...529442:/home/garvin/research/tel/R-alpha/unpatched/R-1.9.0/lib/R/bin/R.bin: /sbin/loader: Fatal Error: call to

Hello all, https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15418#c20 "This could be a shortterm fix in order to behave like an unpatched windows server" What is the attack scenario of an unpatched windows server? After all Microsoft likely patched to fix an issue, the short term solution probably restores not only NLA but also the vulnerability.. I am not arguing against the fix, as the

I have a small embedded 486 system that is having a very strange problem booting the linux kernel. The system boots fine normally, but if I don't do a proper shutdown on it (everything is in ramdisk anyway) then I can no longer boot the 2.6 kernel. It simply hangs after the "Ready.": SYSLINUX 2.10 2004-06-18 Copyright (C) 1994-2004 H. Peter Anvin boot: Loading

This is automatically generated email about markup problems in a man page for which you appear to be responsible. If you are not the right person or list, please tell me so I can correct my database. See http://catb.org/~esr/doclifter/bugs.html for details on how and why these patches were generated. Feel free to email me with any questions. Note: These patches do not change the modification

Hello, 1) when compiling the lustre modules for the server the ./configure script behaves a bit odd. The --enable-server option is silently ignored when the kernel is not 100% patched. Unfortunatly the build works for the server, but during the mount the error message claims about a missing "lustre" module which is loaded and running. What is really missing are the ldiskfs et al

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Subject: Potential Arbitrary File Access Affected Versions: Samba 2.2.x <= 2.2.11 and Samba 3.0.x <= 3.0.5 Summary: A remote attacker may be able to gain access to files which exist outside of the share's defined path. Such files must still be readable by the account used for the connection. Patch Availability - ------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Subject: Potential Arbitrary File Access Affected Versions: Samba 2.2.x <= 2.2.11 and Samba 3.0.x <= 3.0.5 Summary: A remote attacker may be able to gain access to files which exist outside of the share's defined path. Such files must still be readable by the account used for the connection. Patch Availability - ------------------

Hi, I recently came across a situation where "rsync --inplace" performs very poorly. If both the source and destination files contain long sequences of identical blocks, but not necessarily in the same location, the sender can spend an inordinate amount of CPU time finding matching blocks. In my case, I came across this problem while backing up multi-hundred-gigabyte MySQL database