similar to: Samba 4.2.0rc4 can't authenticate users

This problem shows up on both Linux and Solaris. I am going to show the logs from a Fedora 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 machine. We are using 'security = domain' with a Windows 2000 domain controller. We are setting 'password server = starfish2' dispite the fact that the documentation says that this in not necessary as we have found it to be necessary. We are setting 'workgroup =

Adding a section of a debug level 5 log at the end that looks like it might have some usefull information. > This problem shows up on both Linux and Solaris. I am going to show > the logs from a Fedora 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 machine. > > We are using 'security = domain' with a Windows 2000 domain controller. > We are setting 'password server = starfish2' dispite the

> > On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 11:44 -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: > > > This problem shows up on both Linux and Solaris. I am going to show > > > the logs from a Fedora 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 machine. > > > > > > We are using 'security = domain' with a Windows 2000 domain controller. > > > We are setting 'password server = starfish2'

>>> On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 11:44 -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: >>>> This problem shows up on both Linux and Solaris. I am going to show >>>> the logs from a Fedora 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 machine. >>>> >>>> We are using 'security = domain' with a Windows 2000 domain controller. >>>> We are setting 'password server =

> On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 11:44 -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: > > This problem shows up on both Linux and Solaris. I am going to show > > the logs from a Fedora 2.6.25-14.fc9.i686 machine. > > > > We are using 'security = domain' with a Windows 2000 domain controller. > > We are setting 'password server = starfish2' dispite the fact that the > >

I am trying to join a Fedora Linux box running Samba 4.1.5 to a Windows Server 2000 domain controller as an additional domain controller. I should mention that our realm is the same as our domain name, adi.com. This is a 15 year old mistake. And the Windows DC does not have all of our machines listed. To work around that I have delegated _msdcs, _sites, _tcp and _udp to the Windows DC with name

I am testing Samba 4.5.0rc2 on a Solaris 10 i386 box. log.smbd contains a new message/error that does not show up on Samba 4.4.5. The error is: [2016/08/26 11:45:54.886237, 0] ../source3/rpc_server/rpc_service_setup.c:539(dcesrv_ep_setup) dcesrv_ep_setup: Loading shared RPC modules failed Dispite that, Samba 4.5.0rc2 seems to work correctly. Is this a problem or not? Tom Schulz Applied

> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:22:15PM -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: > > Checking for C99 vsnprintf : not found > > Can you just hand-compile lib/replace/test/snprintf.c and > paste its output? Maybe take a closer look why it fails? > > That's the test we use to check whether we have to replace > snprintf. > > Volker Perhaps what was

> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:19:30PM -0400, Thomas Schulz via samba wrote: > > I am testing Samba 4.5.0rc2 on a Solaris 10 i386 box. log.smbd contains > > a new message/error that does not show up on Samba 4.4.5. The error is: > > > > [2016/08/26 11:45:54.886237, 0] > > ../source3/rpc_server/rpc_service_setup.c:539(dcesrv_ep_setup) > > dcesrv_ep_setup:

Should I file a bug at bugzilla.samba.org for problems with a release candidate? > I am not quite certain where to report this, so I will start here. > I am trying to do a test build of Samba 4.2.0rc4 on a Solaris 10 i386 > machine. I ran configure as follows: > > #! /bin/sh > CFLAGS="-O3 -I/opt/local/include" \ >

> On 2/16/2015 10:14 AM, Thomas Schulz wrote: >>> My apologies for being too new to this whole process... >>> >>> Server was AIX 5.3/Samba 2.2.7, authenticating only against the AD. No >>> single sign-on, kerberos, or LDAP to my knowledge; smbd processes never >>> load kerberos or LDAP libraries. Upgraded to AIX 7.1/Samba 3.3.12, which >>>

I am not quite certain where to report this, so I will start here. I am trying to do a test build of Samba 4.2.0rc4 on a Solaris 10 i386 machine. I ran configure as follows: #! /bin/sh CFLAGS="-O3 -I/opt/local/include" \ LDFLAGS="-R/opt/local/samba4/lib:/opt/local/samba4/lib/private:/opt/local/lib \ -L/opt/local/lib -liconv -lintl" \ ./configure

> My apologies for being too new to this whole process... > > Server was AIX 5.3/Samba 2.2.7, authenticating only against the AD. No > single sign-on, kerberos, or LDAP to my knowledge; smbd processes never > load kerberos or LDAP libraries. Upgraded to AIX 7.1/Samba 3.3.12, which > didn't go smoothly; customer is upgrading to Windows Server 2012 AD in a > couple of

I will probably file a bug about this, but perhaps someone here will have some ideas. We have a problem with files being deleted instead of being saved when making changes in Microsoft Excel. The log shows an error of: 'Lock order violation'. This is with Samba 4.1.6 and happens on both Linux (2.6.25-14.fc9.i686) and Solaris 10. No such problem when running Samba 3.6.22. We have a setup

I am trying to see if Samba 4.2.0rc4 will run on a Solaris 10 i386 system. After getting it to build, startup fails. Starting it up as smbd -i -d 10 The output indicates that everything is starting normally until the following is output: messaging_dgm_lockfile_create: ftruncate failed: Invalid argument messaging_dgm_init: messaging_dgm_create_lockfile failed: Invalid argument messaging_dgm_init

>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:04:03AM -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: >>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:13:42AM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote: >>>> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 08:59:21PM -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote: >>>> > > Ah ok - I expected as much. snprintf seems to be >>>> > > broken in that it's returning -1. >>>>

> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:22:15PM -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: > > Checking for C99 vsnprintf : not found > > Can you just hand-compile lib/replace/test/snprintf.c and > paste its output? Maybe take a closer look why it fails? > > That's the test we use to check whether we have to replace > snprintf. > > Volker I went ahead and hand

> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 05:18:51PM -0500, Thomas Schulz wrote: > > I went ahead and hand compiled it. It dies with a Segmentation Fault. > > The problem line is: > > > > if (snprintf(buf, 20, "%s", 0) < 3) exit(7); > > > > If I comment that one out then it runs OK and prints 1. > > > > So the Solaris snprintf is most

>>>> Hello Thomas >>>> >>>> Am 06.04.2015 um 17:22 schrieb Thomas Schulz: >>>>> For anyone considering using Samba 4.2.0, be aware that there is a >>>>> problem with group write permission not being honored. >>>>> >>>>> This is seen on both Linux and Solaris. We have a setup where we have

> I'm attempting to build 4.2.0rc4 on a FreeBSD 10.0 system. There seems > to be a problem with finding the system headers. Specifically > lib/texpect/texpect.c seems to not be finding /usr/include/sys/signal.h > > Some hints on waf or building samba would be appreciated Look at bugs 10833 11092 at bugzilla.samba.org. The patch there most likely is looking for signal.h in