similar to: After Update

On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:41:54 +0100 miguel medalha via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hello > > In one of my DCs, when I run ./configure for Samba 4.9.0, it fails > with the following message: > > Checking for lmdb >= 0.9.16 via header check : not > found Samba AD DC and --enable-selftest requires lmdb 0.9.16 or later > > My ./configure command

I hope that someone here can give some advice on the following: I have a Samba based Active Directory. A CentOS 7.6 machine runs as a file server and hosts the Windows user profiles for all the Windows workstations. Now management has decided that they need a Windows server for a couple of administrative applications, which need MS SQL Server. That would be the only role of this Windows.

I'm using RHEL 7.4 I have built the samba from source, downloaded the tar file then extract ./configure make make install and I have installed all required packages and dependencies including gpgyme and I don't know why it's not working. ________________________________ From: Rowland Penny <rpenny at samba.org> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 3:57 PM To: samba at

>> Did you think to run 'samba-tool domain tombstones expunge --help' ? No, I didn't, I just assumed that the message "'samba' will remove them daily, 'samba-tool domain tombstones expunge' would do that immediately" would mean exactly that :-). It worked now. Thank you!

> On 04 Jun 2016, at 22:14, Miguel Medalha <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: > > >> Can someone therefore please explain to me what exactly these GPO >> restrictions are that Samba can't handle? I'd also appreciate if someone >> could list which other GPO I cannot set successfully using RSAT. > > It seems to me that the FAQ is pretty clear. The

On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:32:01 +0100 "miguel medalha" <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: > > >having a particular group > > > set as "Primary group" > > > How are setting the 'primary group' ? > > The 'primary group' had been set a long time ago, when the system was > created. It had been set with ADUC, under the

On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 16:17:20 +0100 "miguel medalha" <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: > > >> It might help if you tell us what your actual './configure' was ? > > >> Something else might be pulling in the requirement for lmdb. > > Here it goes: > > ./configure -j 8 --with-systemd --with-statedir=/usr/local/samba/var >

Hi all, A - I thought badlock mitigation was about encrypting SMB traffic, at least most part of it. And this encryption of most part of data transfer could (or should) lower performances. It seems I was wrong: smallest part (something like commands) are encrypted but not SMB traffic (ie file transfer). This for SMB protocol prior to SMB3 (which comes with windows 8). B - According to what I

> > Finally 'browseable' is redundant on a Samba AD DC, there is no > browsing on an AD DC. > Well, sometimes you just *have* to do some file serving out of an AD DC. It happened to me. In that case, if you don't have "browsable = yes" on a share, that share will not appear in the Computer Management applet in Windows and you won't be able to set its

On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:20:15 +0100 "miguel medalha" <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: > > > > By default, every AD user is a member of 'Domain Users' and so, > > > > when you use the 'rid' backend every Unix user gets the group as > > > > their primary group. > > > > > > > The only way to change this is by using

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens > Stefan G. Weichinger via samba > Verzonden: vrijdag 6 maart 2020 10:41 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] DCs from 4.10.x to 4.11.x > > Am 06.03.20 um 10:11 schrieb L.P.H. van Belle via samba: > > After upgrade indexing is done as far i know.

Let me be the first (maybe): CentOS 5.2 is here (at least): http://mirror.chpc.utah.edu/pub/centos/5.2/ Thank you all who worked on it! -------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.1/1513 - Release Date: 22-06-2008 7:52

On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 22:32:04 +0100 miguel medalha via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On a particular DC, running 'samba-tool dbcheck' produces the > following: > >     NOTICE: found 2 expired tombstones, 'samba' will remove them > daily, 'samba-tool domain tombstones expunge' would do that > immediately. > > When I run

Just responding on one point.. On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 at 21:35, Tom Diehl via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > In addition, I tried running samba-tool dbcheck --cross-ncs --fix > that command generates over 400 errors that it claims it is going to fix > but > it does not. > > (pht-vdc1 pts9) # samba-tool dbcheck --cross-ncs --fix --yes > [...] > ERROR: Failed

I had the same problem, it was the DN of one of my OU? I remplaced the "ü" with a "ue" and everything was fine. Am 05.03.19 um 18:10 schrieb miguel medalha via samba: > I decided to give Samba 4.9.x a new try as AD DC in one of my servers. > It has been running version 4.8.9. I installed version 4.9.4 and when I > ran samba-tool dbcheck I still obtained the following

Thanks for taking a moment of your time to answer my question. I appreciate you. On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Miguel Medalha via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > The answer to your question is already in this list. Search February's > archives for "dbcheck", "4.7.5", and "bug 13228". Also read the Release > Notes for version 4.7.5.

On a particular DC, running 'samba-tool dbcheck' produces the following:     NOTICE: found 2 expired tombstones, 'samba' will remove them daily, 'samba-tool domain tombstones expunge' would do that immediately. When I run 'samba-tool domain tombstones expunge' the following is produced:     Removed 0 objects and 0 links successfully Running 'samba-tool

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Miguel Medalha <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: >>> Could someone recommend good Linux software RAID primer. It would >> be good if it has good coverage of monitoring and dealing with failures. > > https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Linux_Raid +1 and practice recovery scenarios using VMs with virtual disks. -- Arun Khan

--On Saturday, September 14, 2019 5:23 PM +0100 miguel medalha <medalist at sapo.pt> wrote: > they need a Windows server for a couple of administrative applications Do they really need Server for that, or would a workstation do? I use a workstation as a license server for one app, and another workstation for the management console for the burglar alarm and antivirus. I've got my

I did that kind of in the past. Now I dont because I have plenty of resoruces available. But. So far you have not provided stats on server usage (cpu,ram) over a 24hour or 7 day 8am-5pm timeframe. So I will asume you have plenty of usage/performance to spare. I suggest you to -if possible- replicate the current server setup somewhere else and then install the KVM and dependencies via yum. That way