similar to: Samba 4.2.0: Group write permission not honored

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von:schulz at adi.com <schulz at adi.com> > Gesendet: Mon 6 April 2015 19:17 > An: mmuehlfeld at samba.org; samba at lists.samba.org > Betreff: Re: [Samba] Samba 4.2.0: Group write permission not honored > > > Hello Thomas > > > > Am 06.04.2015 um 17:22 schrieb Thomas Schulz: > > > For anyone considering using

>>>> 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

>>> 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 >>>> project directory trees

> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:14:32 -0400 (EDT) > Thomas Schulz via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > We are running Samba 4.4.6 as a file server. > > In the logs for a few client machines I see entries such as: > > > > [2016/09/29 22:36:58.862575, 0] > > ../source3/param/loadparm.c:4402(widelinks_warning) > > Share 'IPC$'

> 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 >>>

> Hi! > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:25:45PM +0000, Briar Jim wrote: > > Hi all. I'm trying to install Samba 4.2.0 on a Solaris 64 bit Unix > > server by doing the following but the configure script fails with > > "Couldn't determine size of 'bool'", any ideas ? :- > > Solaris 10? I just checked, it seems to work on Solaris 11. >

> > Good morning. > > I am looking to resolve the above vulnerability on our T-4 Solaris boxes. I have not worked or patch Samba before and not sure of the process. > > When I find and apply the patch will it resolve the issue on the version that we are running or do I need to bring our current version more up to date? > > Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

I joined a Fedora Linux box running Samba 4.1.5 to a Windows Server 2000 domain controller as an additional domain controller with the command: samba-tool domain join adi.com DC -Uadministrator --realm=adi.com --dns-backend=BIND9_DLZ The messages indicated that this was mostly sucessfull with the exception of the message: NO DNS zone information found in source domain, not replicating DNS

Arter managing to build Samba 4.1.5 on Solaris 10 i386. I tried to join an existing Windows 2000 Server Active Directory domain as an additional domain controller. The join started to work and then died with the error: Error: Samba was compiled without the posix ACL support that s3fs requires. Try installing libacl1-dev or libacl-devel, then re-run configure and make. I downloaded acl-2.2.52 and

This may not be a Samba problem, but perhaps people here know the answer. We are installing some Windows 8.1 Pro computers. The servers running Samba 4.2.19 and 4.3.0 are not showing up in the Network display. Our domain controller is also not showing up. The Windows 7 computers are showing up. The domain controller is a Windows 2000 machine. I can manually map network drives to the servers

We are running Samba 4.4.6 as a file server. In the logs for a few client machines I see entries such as: [2016/09/29 22:36:58.862575, 0] ../source3/param/loadparm.c:4402(widelinks_warning) Share 'IPC$' has wide links and unix extensions enabled. These parameters are incompatible. Wide links will be disabled for this share. I assume that Share 'IPC$' is some sort of

When Samba goes up a more major version (such as from 4.4.* to 4.5.*), they sometimes rearrange what files go in what directories. The best way to avoid trouble is to clean out the old version before installing the new one. If you build Samba to be installed in something like /usr/local then it is easy to remove the old files before installing the new ones. If you build Samba to go into the system

>> From: schulz at adi.com (Thomas Schulz) >> To: durwin at mgtsciences.com, h.reindl at thelounge.net, > samba at lists.samba.org >> Date: 02/25/2015 06:39 PM >> Subject: Re: [Samba] Workgroup name too long >> Sent by: samba-bounces at lists.samba.org >> >>>> From: Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> >>>> To: samba at

> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:14:44 -0400 (EDT) > schulz at adi.com (Thomas Schulz) wrote: > > > > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:14:32 -0400 (EDT) > > > Thomas Schulz via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > > We are running Samba 4.4.6 as a file server. > > > > In the logs for a few client machines I see entries such as: >

>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:14:44 -0400 (EDT) >> schulz at adi.com (Thomas Schulz) wrote: >> >>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:14:32 -0400 (EDT) >>>> Thomas Schulz via samba &lt;samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We are running Samba 4.4.6 as a file server. >>>>> In the logs for a few client machines I

> On 21/04/15 09:17, Peter Grotz - Obel und Partner GbR wrote: > > Hallo, > > > > > > > > samba 4.2 is released for some time now. Sernet usually doesn?t take a lot > > of time to release their new packages. > > > > But now we haven?t heard a peep from them. Are they gone or will there be > > another fine release? > > > >

For anyone wanting to build and install Samba on a Solaris machine: I have successfully built and installed Samba 4.1.4 on a Solaris 10 i386 machine. You will have to build and install a newer version of Python before you can configure Samba. You must configure Python with --enable-shared. See bug 10261 at bugzilla.samba.org for the details of why that is. If you are going to build Samba with the

> 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. > > > > > > Is this our snprintf or one from Solaris ? Can > > > you try and track down why it's returning

>From a discussion on samba technical about the inability to have Samba work as a DC when the original DC is a Windows Server 2000 machine. > > as Andrew asked you previously, the main question is : do you have some > > specific requirements for keeping a DC on that computer (eg. Exchange or > > whatever)? > > > > If you don't need to keep the DC role on

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 =