similar to: Accessing guest Samba shares from Windows 10/11 without hacks

On 5/28/24 7:21 AM, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 2024 00:03:23 +0000 > "Artem S. Tashkinov via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I'm quite concerned that in order to access guest Samba shares in >> Windows 10 you have to enable Insecure Guest Logons for the Lanman >> Workstation and in Windows 11

On Tue, 28 May 2024 00:03:23 +0000 "Artem S. Tashkinov via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm quite concerned that in order to access guest Samba shares in > Windows 10 you have to enable Insecure Guest Logons for the Lanman > Workstation and in Windows 11 you even need to disable "Digitally Sign > Communications". > >

> Is there a simple SoHo samba configuration that works for W10/W11 > clients? I don't want to use Samba as a DC or anything like that. > So, are there any Samba options that can be used with vanilla W10/W11 > enterprise installations without altering group/local security policies? Yesterday a link mentioned that Windows changed 'vanilla' flavor, it introduces two new

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105884 Bug ID: 105884 Summary: Firefox causes a crash in the nouveau driver on GTX 1060 Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) OS: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: medium Component:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103753 Bug ID: 103753 Summary: Visual glitches on GTX 1060 6GB/4.13.x Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) OS: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau Assignee: nouveau at

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104652 Bug ID: 104652 Summary: None of the video outputs are usable for GTX 1060 - jerky video very few seconds Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) OS: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: medium

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100660 Bug ID: 100660 Summary: [nouveau] No temperature/voltages/GPU and RAM frequency/fan speed reporting for GTX 1060 6GB Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: Other OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100659 Bug ID: 100659 Summary: [nouveau] Certain errors on initializing GTX 1060 6GB Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: Other OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau Assignee: nouveau at

Hi All, I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in other paths through other successors. Since the spill is reloaded only in a certain path, it must be okay to sink such spill close to its reloads. In the AArch64 code below, there is a spill(x2) in the entry, but this value is reloaded only in %bb.1, not in

On 2018-02-22 11:14, gberry at codeaurora.org wrote: > FROM: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] ON BEHALF OF > Jun Lim via llvm-dev > SENT: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM > > Hi All, > > I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is > reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in > other paths through other

From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Jun Lim via llvm-dev Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM Hi All, I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in other paths through other successors. Since the spill is reloaded only in a certain path, it must be okay to sink such

> From: junbuml at codeaurora.org [mailto:junbuml at codeaurora.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:39 AM > > On 2018-02-22 11:14, gberry at codeaurora.org wrote: > > FROM: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] ON BEHALF OF > > Jun Lim via llvm-dev > > SENT: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM > > > > Hi All, > > > > I

All, If we can speculatively execute a load instruction, why isn’t it safe to hoist it out by promoting it to a scalar in LICM pass? There is a comment in LICM pass that if a load/store is conditional then it is not safe because it would break the LLVM concurrency model (See commit 73bfa4a). It has an IR test for checking this in test/Transforms/LICM/scalar-promote-memmodel.ll However, I have

I think gcc is right. It inserted a branch for n == 0 (the cbz at the top), so that's not a problem. In all other regards, this is safe: if you examine the sequence of loads and stores, it eliminated all but the first load and all but the last store. How's that unsafe? If I had to guess, the bug here is that LLVM doesn't want to hoist the load over the condition (which it is right

Hi, Jiong, Thanks for the patch! It is a great start to support 32bit register in BPF. In the past, I have studied a little bit to see whether 32bit register support may reduce the number of unnecessary shifts on x86_64 and improve the performance. Looking through a few bpf programs and it looks like the opportunity is not great, but still nice to have if we have this capability. As you

Thanks for the background on the concurrent memory model. So, is it sufficient that the loop entry is guarded by condition (cbz at top) for preventing the race? The loop entry will be guarded by condition if loop has been rotated by loop rotate pass. Since LICM runs after loop rotate, we can use ScalarEvolution::isLoopEntryGuardedByCond to check if we can speculatively execute load without

Dear all, I'm looking to create a formula within a function to pass to glmer() and I'm having a problem that the following example will illustrate: library(lme4) y1 = rnorm(10) x1 = data.frame(x11=rnorm(10), x12=rnorm(10), x13=rnorm(10)) x1 = data.matrix(x1) w1 = data.frame(w11=sample(1:3,10, replace=TRUE), w12=sample(1:3,10, replace=TRUE), w13=sample(1:3,10, replace=TRUE)) test1 <-

Hello, We're using Samba 4.1.11 as domain controllers and over the past two weeks I've run into several issues with unrelated Windows software, the problems of which all point to Kerberos authentication and SPNs as being somehow involved. If there are many more issues it might start to get politically difficult *not* to blame the DCs, and I don't want to point fingers at Samba. Are

Hi, I have certain situations where I want to manage user attributes, if the user already exists on a system, but not actually create them if they are missing. Is there a way to do this? I tried removing the explicit "ensure => present", but this seems to have no effect (i.e. missing users still created). I am running 2.7.9. Thanks, Alan -- You received this message because

pylon:/var/lib/glusterd/vols/dev_apkmirror_data # ack shared-brick-count dev_apkmirror_data.pylon.mnt-pylon_block3-dev_apkmirror_data.vol 3: option shared-brick-count 3 dev_apkmirror_data.pylon.mnt-pylon_block2-dev_apkmirror_data.vol 3: option shared-brick-count 3 dev_apkmirror_data.pylon.mnt-pylon_block1-dev_apkmirror_data.vol 3: option shared-brick-count 3 Sincerely, Artem --