similar to: mkdir-dup test flapping

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 04:11:05PM +1300, Douglas Bagnall wrote: > We looked at this some more, and Andrew seemed to understand and wrote > the attached patch. Great catch you guys ! Thanks for taking a look, I've been busy on other stuff for the past few weeks. Let me go through the issue and proposed code *really* carefully :-). The open code can be really tricky (as you've

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 04:11:05PM +1300, Douglas Bagnall wrote: > We looked at this some more, and Andrew seemed to understand and wrote > the attached patch. > > We need to decide if the change in owner is enough reason to refuse > the open(), or if we should just continue. > > On the basis that the owner change is not significant, we reworked the > code to do the

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 04:03:49PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:46:19PM -0700, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 06:44:05PM +0200, Ralph Böhme wrote: > > > > > > Cheerio! > > > -slow > > > > Still reviewing this - but a few things that will need changing: > > > > When adding the

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 06:33:26PM +0200, Ralph Böhme via samba wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:14:00PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 04:06:42PM +0200, Ralph Böhme via samba wrote: > > > > > > Yeah, as much as I'd like to avoid adding a new option, I guess we > > > have to do something about it, my latest take on this is >

Hi all, On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 03:00:49PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 08:42:48PM +0200, Ervin Heged?s wrote: > > Dear Samba users, > > > > here is an Ubuntu 14.04, with Samba 4 (4.1.6), and LDAP (slapd > > 2.4.31). The config came from a previous system (Debian Squeezy), > > which had been crashed (HW error - on this new machine,

T.D.Lee@durham.ac.uk wrote: > > > But we'd like to go one step further and have the return code from preexec > be used to continue or abort the connection being established. The script > above would be modified to generate this return code. > > Looking through the source code (smbd/service.c), it doesn't seem to check > the return code (calling smbrun to do the

Hi, I'm hunting a bug in 3.0.x (tested on 3.0.10 and 3.0.20). Users can create and modfy files, but cannot delete them. The logs show [2005/09/21 20:48:14, 0, pid=18388, effective(4019, 412), real(4019, 0)] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_log(767) tdb(/srv/physik.fu-berlin.de/data/.samba/cluster1-test/cache/locking.tdb): expand_file ftruncate to 8192 failed (Permission denied) [2005/09/21 20:48:15, 0,

Whenever I try to read or modify ACLs from my Windows 2000 PDC, my Samba Domain Member Server (Security = ADS) does not allow setting ACLs, nor does it display the existing ACLs. - I have setup ACLs in my Kernel - I have translated and installed libacl and libattr - I can see and modify ACLs with getfacl and setfacl. - I have translated Samba 3.0.23d with --with-acl-support=yes - I have enabled

Hello, Back when 2.2.2 was the current samba release I came across the following problem when deleting folders in Windows 2000 which I'll repost again below. After I finally got his attention with a few very wordy messages to the samba mailing list, Jeremy fixed it blazingly fast and wrote me back: "I just found the problem and fixed it in 2.2 CVS and HEAD CVS. It was to do with the

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 12:46:12PM +0200, Ralph Böhme via samba wrote: > > ...and this one even has bug urls in all commit messages. Sorry for > forgetting this in the previous version. Juuuusttt *one* leetle change, sorry :-). I was following the changes to the talloc heirarchy in the code and realized that adding the following change made it much clearer (at least to me). diff --git

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greetings, I am encountering a problem with Samba and setting acl's for files/directories from the security dialog on my Windows clients. I can easily toggle the file permissions. However, it am not able to add/remove user/groups from the GUI interface on my windows clients. I have also noticed when I add access with setfacl it doesn't not

Hi, this is the first time I've tryed to build a 64 Bit Version with acl's enabled - so I expect I could duplicate this with older versions too... Here's the build info: System: AIX 6100-07-01-1141 Compiler: IBM xlc CC=xlc_r -g CXX=xlC_r CFLAGS=-qmaxmem=-1 -DSYSV -D_AIX -D_AIX32 -D_AIX41 -D_AIX43 -D_AIX51 -D_AIX52 -D_AIX53 -D_AIX61 -D_ALL_SOURCE -DFUNCPROTO=15 -O

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 09:59:14PM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >07.06.2024 20:52, Jeremy Allison wrote: > >>Fair enough. Can you post a minimal smb.conf and directory >>setup that reproduces the problem and how to demo it with smbclient >>command lines please ? I know I'm asking to be spoon-fed but my time for >>Samba these days is quite limited and

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.16 release series. Changes since 4.16.2 -------------------- o? Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> ?? * BUG 15099: Using vfs_streams_xattr and deleting a file causes a panic. o? Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall at catalyst.net.nz> ?? * BUG 14986: Add support for bind 9.18. ?? * BUG

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.16 release series. Changes since 4.16.2 -------------------- o? Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> ?? * BUG 15099: Using vfs_streams_xattr and deleting a file causes a panic. o? Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall at catalyst.net.nz> ?? * BUG 14986: Add support for bind 9.18. ?? * BUG

Is behavior of ACLs under Samba 3.3.0 (Sernet) completely different from that under version 3.2.7? The release notes only talks about some "fixes". I installed version 3.3.0 and got completely different result with the same filesystem and the exact same samba configuration. The ACLs behaved strangely and appeared very different under Windows ACL editor. Users were now unable to

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 06:44:05PM +0200, Ralph Böhme wrote: > > Cheerio! > -slow Still reviewing this - but a few things that will need changing: When adding the validate_nt_acl_blob() function in [PATCH 06/12] vfs_acl_common: move the ACL blob validation to a helper function this makes some of the existing function names in debug statements incorrect. Eg. validate_nt_acl_blob()

07.06.2024 20:52, Jeremy Allison wrote: > Fair enough. Can you post a minimal smb.conf and directory > setup that reproduces the problem and how to demo it with smbclient > command lines please ? I know I'm asking to be spoon-fed but my time for > Samba these days is quite limited and this would aid immensely > in creating a properly tested fix. You're not asking to be

Here is the scenario: AD-authentication is functioning fine. I can query users and group info from wbinfo and getent just fine. The clients can map to the shares, but cannot write to the shares. I have tried variations of chmod 777 on absolute paths to enable read/write access to no avail. The share is configured as such: [student] comment = Test share path = /home/share/students

Using the latest SerNet 4.8.1 build, I'm seeing users being unable to write into newly created shares until smbd is restarted. Here's the relevant log part: [2018/06/14 16:04:29.229329, 5] ../source3/smbd/filename.c:662(unix_convert) unix_convert begin: name = New folder, dirpath = , start = New folder [2018/06/14 16:04:29.229375, 5] ../source3/smbd/vfs.c:1458(check_reduced_name)