similar to: Samba4, ZFS and FreeBSD

Hello! I've just built my first samba4 (4.0.5) on an OpenIndiana machine without any problems. But when it comes to the provision step the problems begin. Everything is fine, if I call samba-tool with the --use-ntvfs option. But I want to use samba4 with s3fs because of the support for newer SMB protocol versions. But when I call samba-tool without --use-ntvfs option I got the following:

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:03:05 +0100 Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 12:41:47 +0100 > Cameron Murdoch via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > On 2 September 2016 at 12:21, Rowland Penny via samba > > <samba at lists.samba.org > > > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 11:51:02 +0100

On 2 September 2016 at 12:21, Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org > wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 11:51:02 +0100 > Cameron Murdoch <cam at macaroon.net> wrote: > > > On 2 September 2016 at 09:53, Rowland Penny via samba > > <samba at lists.samba.org > > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:12:21 +0100 > > >

We had used Samba 4 alpha 17 for a long time and want to update our server now to Samba 4.0.x. The old Samba versions was using NTVFS and Samba 4.0.x is now using S3FS by default. So, what is the best practice now? Should we stay on NTVFS or should we switch to S3FS? The global part of our smb.conf looks like this: --- [global] interfaces = eth0 netbios name = PDC

On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 21:30:20 +1300 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 08:12 +0000, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > > On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 21:07:48 +1300 > > Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a lot of work to change the situation, even more so

I have an existing install of Samba4 ( I think beta6 vintage ), which uses ntvfs and bind9. It's only providing AD and Group Policy. I have a seperate file server running 3.6.x. I want to add a server to the domain running the most recent RC. I know they are using internal by default and s3fs for the file shares on sysvol. Can s3fs coexist with ntvfs? Can the internal DNS coexist with

I am trying to install samba 4.5.1 from source, as a domain controller only, under Ubuntu 16.04, with ZFS filesystem (actually inside an lxd container with ZFS backing). Out-of-the-box, samba-tool domain provision does not like the filesystem: ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): Provision failed - ProvisioningError: Your filesystem or build does not support posix

Hi, I am trying to create a build on CircleCi with smaba4 AD. It seems the filesytem doesn't support ACL's, which s3fs requires. I get the folowing error: ?ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): Provision failed - ProvisioningError: Your filesystem or build does not support posix ACLs, which s3fs requires.? Try the mounting the filesystem with the

Reading Whatsnew.txt in samba I understand that If I use s3fs, as it is set by default in the provision step, I won't be able to modify GPOs later, right? So I have a couple of questions: - What's the advantage of using s3fs over ntvfs in new installations? - If I'm planning to deploy a new Domain, probably needing to change GPOs later, should I select ntvfs??? Best regards, Felix

I've noticed that the samba-tool ntacl sysvolreset --use-s3fs command does not work on a ZFS filesystem on FreeBSD. It does work if sysvol is moved to a volume that is able to be mounted with the acls flag. I will reference a ticket I started with FreeNAS here: https://bugs.freenas.org/issues/4351 As of version 9.2.1.1 s3fs is now the default using the workaround known for FreeBSD.

Hi, how can I what filer server is currently running in samba4, s3fs or ntvfs? My smb.conf looks like this: server services = s3fs, rpc, nbt, wrepl, ldap, cldap, kdc, drepl, winbind, ntp_signd, kcc, dnsupdate, web dcerpc endpoint servers = epmapper, wkssvc, rpcecho, samr, netlogon, lsarpc, spoolss, drsuapi, dssetup, unixinfo, browser, eventlog6, backupkey, dnsserver Im asking as when looging

On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 21:07:48 +1300 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > > It is a lot of work to change the situation, even more so without loss > of important tests.  A number of tests, particularly for spoolss but > also of the cifs proxy (which in turn tests kerberos delegation), use > the ntvfs file server. OK, but how can you be sure that something you are

On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 07:50:23 +1300 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 11:43 +0000, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > > On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 12:11:17 +0100 > > Marc Muehlfeld via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > Am 02.12.2016 um 06:55 schrieb Scott

I have a situation where I need to share, via Samba, a filesystem mounted via NFSv4. I'm struggling with the best way to make Samba see the NFSv4 ACLs and enumerate them to provide the proper SMB/CIFS access to the files, instead of "Access Denied" errors that I currently get. Looking at the Samba source, the only obvious NFSv4 stuff appears to be the following: - zfsacl, available

On 2 September 2016 at 13:19, Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org > wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:03:05 +0100 > Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 12:41:47 +0100 > > Cameron Murdoch via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > On 2 September 2016 at 12:21, Rowland Penny

On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 12:11:17 +0100 Marc Muehlfeld via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi Scott, > > Am 02.12.2016 um 06:55 schrieb Scott Mattan via samba: > > I am currently trying to get a Samba 4.5.1 environment set up for > > testing and I am unable to get samba to request a new password from > > a windows user. The error that I get, is in Japanese,

Good morning, folks. I'm involved in a project to enforce NFSv4 ACL's across a variety of storage platforms, in particular NetApps sharing NFS. That works fiine with the NetApp NFS qtrees, but we'd like to share those with CIFS clients as well. This works, and restricts access the way we expect NFSv4 ACL's to work, but the Windows clients cannot view any of the security settings

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 17:24, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 03:54:21PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> I have a situation where I need to share, via Samba, a filesystem mounted via NFSv4. I'm struggling with the best way to make Samba see the NFSv4 ACLs and enumerate them to provide the proper SMB/CIFS access to the files, instead

Hello, I'm trying to configure a CIFS-Proxy. My configuration is: [global] workgroup = MYDOM server role = member server realm = MYDOM.NET netbios name = FS01 server services = +smb +s3fs dcerpc endpoint servers = +winreg +srvsvc [test] ntvfs handler = cifs cifs:server = 192.168.1.10 cifs:share = projects$ but in

I've been playing around with Samba4 as an AD for a domain. I like it a lot and it's been very stable for me. I've been using Samba 3.5 for a while with OpenLDAP and connecting win7 computers fine, sharing files fine and even sharing printers and printer drivers fine. I'd like to move to Samba4 as by backend LDAP and Authentication server and, like many, want to also keep