similar to: Changed the IP address of Samba server, can't logon

Being that you SAMBA developers had to work so hard to reverse engineer the AD protocols. Will there soon be improvements and more full featured functionality in SAMBA now that you have access to more documentation? Is anything on the order of a fully feature AD clone in the works. Also, how do you dance around patented protocols? Can you still implement them? Do you have to avoid them?

I have the Win2000 client(s) in a Samba domain. Domain authentication works fine, my "homes" share works fine, remote profiles work fine. Using 3.0.1Pre1 I would like to add people to "someshare" through the Security tab, and control their access through windows ACL's. How should I setup a share as a basis for doing this? The share below (someshare) in this email

Can a samba domain user login successfully to a PC in the domain if the PC is not connected to the network? This assumes the user has logged on at some point in the past to get their credentials on the local PC of course. Is this a "Standard" feature of SAMBA (allowing Cached credentials) or do you have to some how trick samba to allow this? I've looked in the Official

I'm running Samba 2.27 on RH8 system. I've got samba as the print spooler for Windows XP clients and using winbind as the user validation against my Win2K DC. Permissions on the spool directory are root root with the sticky bit on. Clients can delete their own jobs from the que, but the spool directory is not being expunged of print jobs and the last job constantly displays in the client

I have ACL's enabled and am getting a new error, in the Samba log (V 3.0.1Pre1, when attempting to set permissions on a file through Win2000: get_domain_user_groups: primary gid of user [terry] is not a Domain group ! get_domain_user_groups: You should fix it, NT doesn't like that Do I need to create a group on the windows(2000) side? The entries in the domaingroup.map

I'm trying to establish a two way non-transitive trust between a W2003 A/D box and our SAMBA domain. We are using smbldap so we can log in on any of the linux boxes with the same passwd. Samba is version 3.0.33 on Redhat Enterprise. It's easy to create the trust on the Windows side with AD Domains and Trusts but on the Linux side I'm not sure if I need to put the machine account

Greetings! Is there any way to to lockout a certain machine identified by its ip address after a fix number of bad logon attempts? I'm aware of account policy option "bad lockout attempts" but that would block the whole account and not just the machine. Have a sunny day! Ferdinand

I can't seem to get an answer to this question... Should I use winbind if my Domain Controller is a samba machine? Or is it only useful if my DC is a real MS DC and I have other unix/linux client machines? I'm strictly wanting to provide file and domain logon services to Win2000 machines via a samba DC. There are no other DC's involved. After reading the 3.0 HowTo on winbind

I have the Official Samba 3 and Samba-3 by example books, although not the second edition copies. But I can't seem to find out how to push out patches and hotfixes with Samba. Is this not possible at this time? I don't have a lot of experience with Windows but I am going to have to deal with this issue soon. I think I understand that pushing out policies is possible. Is Microsoft

Chad, et al, In addition to Doug’s excellent technical update, I’ll note that we are starting to have some discussions on the DOE side with PGI about establishing a more formal review team made up of some key LLVM stakeholders to help smooth the way for a broader public rollout of the Flang code base and eventual integration. We’ll probably rely on Hal and others here to help us figure out who

I want to move my Samba 3.0.10 server which is acting as PDC and WINS server to a new server with a differenent hostname and IP address. The old server is being used as a NIS+ server which means it would be very difficult for me to move the old hostname and IP to the new server. I have used the IP of the old server in the WINS server settings in DHCP and have set it by hand on a handful of PCs

No closed doors intended here. Just a recognition that for something like an initial review to be useful, we probably have to be a bit careful in how many people we can reasonably involve before it could get unwieldy, and trying to be respectful of people’s time if we can nail down 90% of issues with a smaller group before going broader. I think we’d be fine with opening up the WebEx presentations

> On May 26, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Neely, Rob via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Chad, et al, > > In addition to Doug’s excellent technical update, I’ll note that we are > starting to have some discussions on the DOE side with PGI about > establishing a more formal review team made up of some key LLVM > stakeholders to help smooth the way for a broader

Hi Chad - We have a functional Fortran compiler, with the PGI front-end bridged directly to LLVM, all of our Fortran runtime libraries integrated, and the Clang driver adapted for use with the Fortran compiler. We're working with a few users at DOE who are trying to compile big applications with a binary version of the compiler. Work is ongoing to migrate the source code into an LLVM-style

The smbstatus utility won't show the names of the Linux machines running in this workgroup, but it does show the names of the WinXP machines. It looks like this: $ smbstatus -b Samba version 3.0.10-1.4E.2 PID Username Group Machine ------------------------------------------------------------------- 23158 steve users 192.168.0.10 (192.168.0.10) 18040

This process is certainly only open to a select group, so pragmatically it's closed. I can understand that it will certainly not be an easy process once it's public due to the amount of code and complexity. Maybe someone can comment on a specific issue - When we ported our Fortran front-end to target llvm, we found that Fortran ENTRY doesn't map very well to llvm ir. Can anyone who

Looking for a solution to this problem. I have Googled all over the place but haven't found a definitive answer. I have a Samba Server that ONCE was on a network where there was SECOND Samba Server with IP Address 192.168.20.3. Today, the FIRST server is on a network with an address range 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 and it has no way of finding that SECOND Server 192.168.20.3. However,

All excellent news! Thanks for the update, Doug! -----Original Message----- From: douglas miles (PGI) [mailto:douglas.miles at pgroup.com] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 2:58 PM To: Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>; mcrosier at codeaurora.org Cc: flang-dev <flang-dev at googlegroups.com>; Rob Neely <neely4 at llnl.gov>; Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>; llvm-dev at

Hello, All is fine when I run in development mode with rails + lighttpd. I''m using the lighttpd.conf file that is auto-generated by Rails. Works just fine in developemtn mode. When I swith to production mode and use my externally routed domain name lighttpd refuses to bind to the address. I know the address works since I run a mail server behind it. I can ssh to it, etc. I have

We changed the external and internal IP addresses and now our DNAT entry is failing. Any ideas? DNAT net loc:10.222.66.10:443 tcp 8084 Thanks, Dave.