similar to: Office: File currently in use by user xyz problem!

Hi, I'm working at a small office. I'm running Samba 2.x for about a year without any problem, it's working absolutely GREAT and the community kicks ass :) We don't have too many machines so about 6 Users use about 3 PCs to do similar tasks. I just setup samba latest 23c-1 as a DC because we got some more machines, and everything's fine. Except when the same account is used

Hi, is it possible to share write locks amongst two samba servers? We are experiencing performance issues all the time, because one location (location A) is connected via VPN to the main location (location B) and needs to access files hosted there on some samba shares. Now loc A gets its own server, but still files hosted in B need to be read/write accessed from A and vice versa. It would be

Hi, thanks for reading, would be great if you could help me out with two strange reoccuring problems. Problem 1: Currently we are running an IBM 206m with Debian Etch and Samba 3.0.24. We have about 25 Clients which are running Windows XP SP2 or 2000 SP4. 3 of those Clients (XP) open and close ~15 excel sheets (size between 100kb and 1MB) approximately every 5 Minutes or so. 5-6 times a day it

When logs (e.g. /var/log/maillog) are rotated (e.g. to /var/log/maillog-YYYYMDD) is there a way via systemd or whatever to assign read permission to a specific group? Right now, for example - ls -l maillog* -rw------- 1 root root 3105240 Mar 13 22:04 maillog -rw------- 1 root root 1079031 Feb 24 04:39 maillog-20190224 -rw------- 1 root root 7237640 Mar 1 12:59 maillog-20190228 -rw------- 1

Hello, I have a strange problem with Samba and LDAP backend with the statement valid users = @group. The valid users = @username works great, but the @group oder +group statement does not work. But the users in the @group does never get access to the shares! I'm using Samba 3.2.5-4 on Debian Lenny the LDAP server is located at an Debian Etch system. But this ldap server works quite good.

Hi, I've a question about the syntax of the valid users option. Any help is greatly appreciated! Here is the Background: samba 3.0.4 Linux as Domain Member Active Directory, not in Native Mode Compiler opions: --with-winbind --with-pam --with-smbmount The goal is to authenticate via the Windows Domain and allow access via Windows groups. The syntax in my smb.conf looks like this:

Dear Friends, Is It Possible to Make a *Share* Visible to a List of Users *Only* ? e.g. If have shares Likes Account, Sales, Support Then I would Like make respective *share* visible *only* to persons in respective dept. Thanks and Best Regards.

Thank you Kees. On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 09:37, Kees van Vloten via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > I am currently running at 4.19.2 but I have run 4.18.6 and 4.18.5. I did > not experience any issues with nested group lookups, which many of the > filters rely on. Interestingly, I've now found that (on my current DCs, running 4.18.5), ldbsearch *does* seem to return the

Folks-- I'm working with an old system I set up to copy files from one local directory to another. I was using rdist for this, but I would prefer to shift it over to rsync. The one thing I'm missing is the trivial ability to force the group owernship of the destination files to a specific group. A read through the manpage and various searches on the web do not turn up any helpful hints

Hi, I'm running Samba Version 3.0.25c on Solaris 10 8/07 on X86 hardware. It's successfully joined to AD. But, and there always is a but, if : * A user is a member of SomeGroup * and the share alllows SomeGroup to access it * and SomeGroup is NOT what the user has set as their Primary Group in Active Directory then * Samba will recognize that the user can access the share * but,

I'm quite confused by this one, as I can't see how this would happen.. but after upgrading my DCs from 4.11.10 to 4.18.5, LDAP searches don't seem to work if they use the :1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941: modifier, aka LDAP_MATCHING_RULE_IN_CHAIN. (Yes, it was a fairly big version jump.. Yes, I should have upgraded much earlier.. Yes, I know 4.19.x is out now as well) Here's a search that

Hi guys, any CUPS / Samba experts out there? The CUPS printing guide is a horrendous maze of options. I've got nearly there but I've got one thing wrong and I don't know where to look. I set up our two printers (HP K5400s) using the GUI printer tool. Both print the test page just fine. I set up the [printers] and [print$] shares and can browse to the printers from Windows (XP for me)

> Normally a group cannot 'own' files etc, Unix uses ugo permissions and > when you chown a file you would use something like this: > > chown foo:somegroup somefile > > this would make 'foo' the owner of the file and possibly allow > 'somegroup' access to it, this would depend on whatever permissions you > set with 'chmod' > > So,

Op 05-11-2023 om 23:25 schreef Jonathan Hunter via samba: > I'm quite confused by this one, as I can't see how this would happen.. > but after upgrading my DCs from 4.11.10 to 4.18.5, LDAP searches don't > seem to work if they use the :1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941: modifier, aka > LDAP_MATCHING_RULE_IN_CHAIN. (Yes, it was a fairly big version jump.. > Yes, I should have

I have an odd problem. I got controllers in a namespace and controllers outside of the namespace. For example, I have a PagesController and a Admin::PagesController. When I run rspec from the top, tests pass and I get the following warning: spec/controllers/admin/pages_controller_spec.rb:4: warning: toplevel constant PagesController referenced by Admin::PagesController This makes no sense. I do

On 2/17/2016 9:43 AM, Rowland penny wrote: > On 17/02/16 17:27, Ian wrote: >> >> On 2/17/2016 5:00 AM, Rowland penny wrote: >>> On 17/02/16 00:03, Ian wrote: >>>> I've recently attempted to migrate some windows server files over to >>>> samba 4 hosted on a FreeNAS server. >>>> >>>> Using robocopy with the /copyall switch,

I'm using samba version 2.2.1a on a linux RH7.2 kernel 2.4.7-10. I'm having a lot of oplock problems, specially when using office applications like word. I would like to know: 1. what is the recommended configuration in version 2.2.1a (oplocks = yes/no , level2 oplocks = yes/no , kernel oplocks = yes/no) 2. what is considered to be a stable version for oplocks usage Thanks, Nir

I have a fedora core 5 server running samba-3.0.23c-1.fc5 from fedora updates. Recently I changed smb.conf to use security=domain instead of security=user. The server that it authenticates against is running fedora core 4 with samba-3.0.14a-2. Anyway, this setup worked just fine for a couple of weeks, but today I yum updated many packages including pam, glibc and kernel on the fedora 5

I am trying to build cross compiler for custom processor (say XYZ) but on compilation it is giving error llvm-build: error: invalid native target: XYZ (not in project) I have tried configuring like these 1. ./configure --target=XYZ 2. ./configure --target=XYZ --enable-targets=XYZ 3. ./configure --enable-targets=XYZ But every time it is not recognising the XYZ processor. What could be the

On 2/21/2020 6:10 PM, TomK via samba wrote: > On 2/21/2020 2:24 PM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >> On 21/02/2020 19:06, torch via samba wrote: >>> Am I missing something?? I don?t see where you are using the ?@? >>> symbol anywhere. >>> Mac is probably interpreting the parameters ?valid users? and ?write >>> list" (correctly, I think ;-) as a