similar to: 3.0.23d - call_nt_transact_ioctl(0x90078): Currently not implemented

All, Since installing my shiny new Samba3 PDC (3.0.23d, ldapsam backend), I've had one recurring issue that's been driving me nuts. Once a minute, Samba on one of the client servers logs the following: getsmbfilepwent: user name cmeyer2 has a negative uid. getsmbfilepwent: user name jhundley has a negative uid. Running pdbedit does the same thing: boothost:/var/log# pdbedit -Lvu

All, I'm using an LDAP backend for a test PDC/BDC setup. Both the PDC and BDC are using the same LDAP server. Both the PDC and BDC are running 3.0.23c on Sarge, and I've verified that both the PDC and BDC will authenticate users via smbclient. XP clients are able to login to the domain fine, and all is generally swell. My PDC is also my WINS server, and I've verified that XP clients

Hey list, I've got a problem with my PDC/BDC setup. They're both running 3.0.23c on Sarge, and I've verified that both the PDC and BDC will authenticate users. test-pdc:/etc/samba# testparm Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf Processing section "[netlogon]" Loaded services file OK. Server role: ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC test-bdc:/var/log/samba# testparm Load smb config

Hi, We have a large (8 CPUs, 32GB RAM) x86 Sun server running x8664 Debian Lenny, with Samba 2:3.2.5-4lenny6. It's a BDC and file server. I have noticed various entries in the log files that I'd like to understand better. Some machines are generating this: [2009/11/16 15:10:49, 0] smbd/nttrans.c:call_nt_transact_ioctl(2019) call_nt_transact_ioctl(0x9005c): Currently not implemented.

Hello, we run samba 2.0.6 on Solaris2.6 and use it together with clearcase (version 3.2.1). Sometimes the checkout of files from a clearcase NT-client hangs and probably causes clearcase to destroy the viewstore. In the samba logfile of that client I found the following message: [2000/02/17 09:29:49, 0] smbd/nttrans.c:call_nt_transact_ioctl(2401) call_nt_transact_ioctl: Currently not

Hopefully some one can help me wit this. I run ubuntu 8.04 server 64 bit edition as a local file and print server. I use samba to act as an NT server for 6 XP pro clients running MS Access database. In my log files I consitanty have the following error which seems to occur when there is more that one user accessing the database: Feb 27 11:36:24 fileserver smbd[11192]: [2010/02/27 11:36:24,

All, I've got a Samba 3 PDC serving numerous XP clients, and I'm getting an error I wouldn't have expected. When trying to rename an XP machine joined to the domain (via "netdom renamecomputer"), the command fails unless the specified domain user has UID 0. The command in question: netdom renamecomputer %COMPUTERNAME% /newname:%NEWNAME% /userD:DOMAIN\USER

Ah, yes. One of the many differences between the US and the rest of the world. >>> support@drdos.info 4/3/2007 2:52:16 PM >>> john beaman wrote: > I too was curious about this, so I copied the text into Babel Fish, and this is the result: > > I miss of the 2/04/2007 to the 11/04/2007. I will answer your message as of my return. For any urgency, to contact Emmanuelle

Debian Sarge, Samba 2.2.12 (legacy install), openLDAP 2.2.17, connecting to a PDC running Samba 2.2.8a. The machine in question failed DIAGNOSIS.txt step 3. I've got a really odd issue -- a Samba server that can "smbclient -L" everyone but itself. Samba still serves shares and PDC authentication works fine, but this failure is annoying, and as such, must be fixed. :) -- issued

As I posted to samba@samba.org one month ago, we found the same error as Chuck Thier (smbd/nttrans.c:call_nt_transact_ioctl(2401) call_nt_transact_ioctl: Currently not implemented.) as a possible reason for some crashes of ClearCase clients on WindowsNT (we use Samba 2.0.6 on Solaris 2.6 and ClearCase 3.2.1). Therefore I support his wish, that this functionality should be implemented in samba

All, I found the solution. By stopping NSCD and THEN purging the passwd table, the bad entries were cleared. Ryan -------------- next part -------------- ------------------------------------------------- This email transmission and any documents, files or previous email messages attached to it may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended

What does the list think of setting "locking = no" on the netlogon share for a PDC? The man page for smb.conf says we should never need to set the parameter, but given that it's a read-only share for most users, I have a hard time discerning any downside to this. Thoughts? Ryan -------------- next part -------------- ------------------------------------------------- This email

I'm not even sure this is a problem with Samba, but here goes* >From smb.conf: log file = /opt/samba/var/log/%m.log As I understand it, this option will create $CLIENT_NETBIOS_NAME.log whenever a client contacts the Samba server in any way. However, I've got clients from outside this samba server's subnet contacting the samba server. I can prove that because a PCs NetBIOS name

Regarding yesterday's message about repeated "signal 11" errors in 2.2.12, I was able to capture a backtrace. #0 0x401543ae in waitpid () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6 #1 0x400e9d12 in system () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6 #2 0x0815ea98 in smb_panic () #3 0x0814d885 in fault_report () #4 0x0814d8e2 in sig_fault () #5 <signal handler called> #6 ldap_free_urllist (ludlist=0x185) at

All: I'm running Samba 2.2.8 as a PDC, using Netscape Directory Server (don't ask :) for an LDAP backend. Is there any technical reason why Samba and LDAP services have to reside on the same server? My predecessors had a lot of trouble getting the two to play nicely when the services were split between two servers, to the point that "don't split samba and LDAP" is now the

I too was curious about this, so I copied the text into Babel Fish, and this is the result: I miss of the 2/04/2007 to the 11/04/2007. I will answer your message as of my return. For any urgency, to contact Emmanuelle Parache Moga or C?dric Buzay. If this guy is really going to be out until November these messages will get rather tiresome... John Beaman Telecom Specialist Voice

You could do what we do - just replace the local machine policies each time you rev the policy set. They're stored in c:\windows\system32\grouppolicy. Using gpscript.exe (Google for it, don't have a specific site) you can dump the contents of either registry.pol file to text. You can also recombine textfiles back into a .pol file, and subsequently rev the gpt.ini file so your new .pol

I'm in the process of replacing a Samba 2.2.12 PDC with Samba 3.0.14a-Debian. An LDAP database serves as the user data store, and I've made no changes to the Samba 2.2.x-compatible LDAP records. Since I don't relish LDAP schema changes, I've specified ldapsam_compat as my passdb backend; I figured that since I was already running a compatible LDAP schema, there was no need to make

Hi William, I got no positive reply since I made my posting. Only you and another guy, who made the same experience. No answer to the question, what functionality has "call_nt_transact_ioctl" and what effect on SAMBA has the missing of this procedure. Sorry, Michael William Soudan schrieb: > Hi Michael, > > I'm getting the same message in our samba logfiles as you

Hello, I just upgraded from 2.05a to 2.0.7 on a RH 6.0 system, upgraded one of the workstations to win2k pro, and didn't change anything to my smb.conf.