similar to: Synology shares not accessible...

Hi Travis, are you still there? ;-) How are your Synos do? Do have in the mean time installed the actual SMBService? If you have and have with the actual SMBService the same problem as before the Beta version there is a workaround: In "/usr/local/packages/@appstore/SMBService/usr/lib/samba" you have to change the "libidmap-samba4.so" to the one from the beta version,

Hi All, the Synology support is claiming this bug is the reason for the access problems via hostname (Kerberos): https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14213 These log entries in log.wb-ADNAME are given as evidence: ../../source3/winbindd/winbindd_msrpc.c:307: [2023/06/14 22:13:42.913399, winbind 3, pid=10150] msrpc_sid_to_name msrpc_sid_to_name: S-1-18-1 f?r Dom?ne ADNAME

Hi Rowland, to be clear, I'm completely your opinion. They had a running 4.15.9(-0619, their own build number), which was a Beta, and the released version (-0632) didn't worked. So for me it's obvious, too. I can bring the released version to run with a library from their beta version: libidmap-samba4.so. The reason for this as they wrote: "A key difference between SMB

There was a Travis Wenks here, who has/had the same problems. I'm still hoping, he's reading the Samba mail list and tell me if he has still the same problems and we maybe can ally for this. Maybe the maintainers who has answered to the bug report can give some advice, too. The problem for me is that the developers from Synology think it can't be their fault. It's a little

On 20/06/2023 18:30, Ingo Asche via samba wrote: > Hi Rowland, > > to be clear, I'm completely your opinion. > > They had a running 4.15.9(-0619, their own build number), which was a > Beta, and the released version (-0632) didn't worked. So for me it's > obvious, too. > > I can bring the released version to run with a library from their beta >

Hi Travis, I know, but this is now the released version (4.15.9-0919 beta > 4.15.9-0631), see the history page for SMB-Service: https://www.synology.com/en-us/releaseNote/SMBService?model=DS918%2B#7_x_series With the beta version it still works. But we can't stay on the beta forever I think. Regards Ingo https://github.com/WAdama Travis Wenks via samba schrieb am 13.04.2023 um 21:29:

The only way I have found to fix that is to enable the beta updates in plugins and install the beta version of samba on the Synology. Thank you, Travis Wenks Rose City Solutions Owner [image: Rose City Skyline Logo] * Phone *503.821.7000 <3464881845> * Website *rosecitysolutions.com <https://rosecitysolutions.com> * Email * travis at rosecitysolutions.com On Thu, Apr 13, 2023

Hi, to all of you which are using Synology NAS systems. With SMB-Service 4.15.9-0631 no longer shares are accessible via domain group rights from a Samba 4.17.7 domain. It seems the same error described in the following mail trails: "No longer access to shares after upgrade to 4.17.3" "File server joined to a samba domain accessed by windows 10-11 clients, works via ip no via

On 20/06/2023 14:11, Ingo Asche via samba wrote: > Hi All, > > the Synology support is claiming this bug is the reason for the access > problems via hostname (Kerberos): > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14213 > > These log entries in log.wb-ADNAME are given as evidence: > > ../../source3/winbindd/winbindd_msrpc.c:307: [2023/06/14 > 22:13:42.913399,

This is the essence of the last message from Synology: For Synology the problem is no problem... They simply say now, we never claimed we are compatible with Samba AD, only with Windows AD, Azure AD and Synology Directory Server: ?? ?"Domain/LDAP ?? ?Features ??? Seamless integration with Windows AD, Azure AD Domain Service, and LDAP servers" See:

Rowland Penny via samba schrieb am 20.06.2023 um 21:01: > Try adding to the bug report. Would that be ok even it's happening on a Synology? Just don't want to mess around. > I don't think that it is their fault, but we will never know, I don't > think we will ever see what modifications they have made to the Samba > code. However, you do not seem to get the problem

I have had many discussions with Synology about this and other attitudes they have been displaying in the last few years. Also if you log into their NAS, using ssh and take a look at some of the comments that have been added into the "ETC" configs, it makes it very clear. They have also been removing any posts relating to methods or help given in the forums that relate to SAMBA ,

Hi Rowland, good point... That seems to be the only SID which popps up in the logs from the Synology device. I found no other. I'm just looking at the same log on my working machines if this is popping up there, too. At least you gave me good hints, how I can answer their request. Thanks for that... Regards Ingo https://github.com/WAdama Rowland Penny via samba schrieb am 21.06.2023

I have pfsense set as the NUT master and my Synology NAS as a slave client. I tried recreating a shutdown sequence by issuing a /usr/local/sbin/upsmon -c fsd command in pfsense (so as to preserve battery lifetime while testing all these) but the weird thing is that my Syno doesn't seem to get a hold of the FSD event. My pfsense master and UPS shuts down properly though. As soon as I issue the

Jeremy Allison schreef op 01-07-2016 19:53: >> So the transition from regular filespace to LUKS filespaces >> (different volume) is not getting this LUKS filespace to appear >> empty to Samba, but not to the linux system itself. Is this to be >> expected? >> >> Is that normal operation, this? > > Hard to tell without logs I'm afraid. We'd need

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Todd Benivegna wrote: > https://forum.synology.com/enu/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=73960&hilit=ups+slave  > > I have the latest version of the Windows port of NUT (A UPS management package) installed on my Windows 7 machine. The UPS I am using is a > very old APC BK650M which is controlled and sends its status via a special serial cable to the Windows

Hi Roger, Here is the /usr/syno/bin/synoups file https://hastebin.com/sibopejuyu.bash Thanks, Todd -- Todd Benivegna // todd at benivegna.com On Aug 9, 2020, 4:49 PM -0400, Roger Price <roger at rogerprice.org>, wrote: > On Sun, 9 Aug 2020, Todd Benivegna wrote: > > > upssched.conf (on Synology): > > CMDSCRIPT /usr/syno/bin/synoups > > > > upssched-cmd (on

> Since it's NUT in the NAS which is deciding to order the shutdown, it would be > useful to see upsmon.conf, upssched.conf and upssched-cmd (or whatever Synology > use if anything) from the NAS to see what criteria they use. upsmon.conf (on Synology): RUN_AS_USER root MONITOR ups at localhost 1 monuser secret master MINSUPPLIES 1 SHUTDOWNCMD "" NOTIFYCMD /usr/sbin/upssched

On 7/5/23 10:20, Ingo Asche via samba wrote: > By the way: Do you know a good Docker Container for Samba which also can > run as Member Server in a domain? ;-) there's the SINK commnunity effort: https://github.com/samba-in-kubernetes/ https://github.com/samba-in-kubernetes/samba-container -slow -- Ralph Boehme, Samba Team https://samba.org/ SerNet Samba Team

Hi, there is some progress, even I would'nt call it that. At least they admitted it's caused through some changes from their side. @Rowland: Remember that "old Samba method" part? This is their answer. I don't know what to make of it. Maybe someone with more knowledge about the develoment of Samba can give me a hint: