similar to: smbstatus: who opened the file?

07.06.2024 07:54, Jeremy Allison wrote: >> msdfs is broken in 4.19.? It worked fine in 4.18. This is not entirely true. >> Is no one using msdfs?? I wonder why I was the first to discover this? > > There must not be a test for your specific use-case. > > MSDFS is tested in the autobuild test suite. Can > you articulate the problem well enough we can > build a

Hi! I joined a newly installed samba (4.20.1) server to a domain, - just testing things. Now I want to remove this test server from a domain, but I can't: root at svdcm2:/# samba-tool domain leave -U tls\\mjt-adm WARNING: Using passwords on command line is insecure. Installing the setproctitle python module will hide these from shortly after program start. Password for [TLS\mjt-adm]:

Hi! For quite some time I'm trying to find what's going on with MSDFS referrals. Samba version is 4.19.6. We've global host msdfs = yes (the default anyway), and for a share in question, msdfs root = yes. testparam confirms the settings. There's a symlink created in the root dir of the share, which points to the same server but different path: dfstest =>

Hi! I'm evaluating how various binaries and components are split into different binary packages in Debian. And am having issues classifying these. Initially there has been request to remove dependency on python3-samba package (this is AD-related stuff) from samba-the-file-server package, to be able to use it on smaller devices. And at the same time, there has been another request to move

07.06.2024 10:13, Kees van Vloten via samba wrote: > There is a little difference with your config: I am not using symlinks in the filesystem but 'msdfs proxy' in smb.conf.? Not sure if that can be > related to your finding? msdfs proxy is not affected in this context. It is the access to msdfs-symlink *files* which broke. Thanks, /mjt -- GPG Key transition (from rsa2048 to

Hi! This is a heads-up for now, more debugging to follow. I had to downgrade samba from 4.20.1 to 4.19.6 because 4.20 broke case insensitive file access entirely. Only exact case filename works, no matter which value is set in "case sensitive" parameter. In 4.19, things works again. /mjt -- GPG Key transition (from rsa2048 to rsa4096) since 2024-04-24. New key:

On 07-06-2024 06:59, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > 07.06.2024 07:54, Jeremy Allison wrote: >>> msdfs is broken in 4.19.? It worked fine in 4.18. > > This is not entirely true. > >>> Is no one using msdfs?? I wonder why I was the first to discover this? >> >> There must not be a test for your specific use-case. >> >> MSDFS is tested in the

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 11:54:28AM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >07.06.2024 10:13, Kees van Vloten via samba wrote: > >>There is a little difference with your config: I am not using >>symlinks in the filesystem but 'msdfs proxy' in smb.conf.? Not sure >>if that can be related to your finding? > >msdfs proxy is not affected in this context. It is

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 04:59:29PM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >07.06.2024 16:57, Michael Tokarev wrote: >>It boils down to having wide links = yes (and wide links = no). > >It boils down to having wide links = yes (and UNIX EXTENSIONS = no) :) Wide links is problematic. I'd love to just remove it :-).

07.06.2024 07:59, Michael Tokarev wrote: > 07.06.2024 07:54, Jeremy Allison wrote: >>> msdfs is broken in 4.19.? It worked fine in 4.18. > > This is not entirely true. Nope. Things are more interesting than that. I've a 4.19 installation where msdfs links works both in listing and when specified directly. There are 2 other installations of 4.19 where msdfs links

Am 07.06.24 um 08:45 schrieb Michael Tokarev: > Please check version of samba-ad-dc package, - is it the same as other > samba package versions? that package isn't installed according to "apt-cache policy" ! Seems it got lost while upgrading. > Did samba-ad-dc start at all? seemed like, but was very fast (so did nothing, as it seems) Did "apt install

On 6/7/24 9:34 AM, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > I had to downgrade samba from 4.20.1 to 4.19.6 because 4.20 > broke case insensitive file access entirely.? Only exact case > filename works, no matter which value is set in "case sensitive" > parameter. hm, can't reproduce: $ bin/smbclient -U "slow%x" //localhost/test smb: \> ls foo foo N

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 07:16:06AM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >06.06.2024 19:33, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > >>For quite some time I'm trying to find what's going on with MSDFS referrals. >>Samba version is 4.19.6. >.. >>However, when opening the directory in question from client, this name is not >>shown in the listing.? Samba skips

07.06.2024 09:39, Stefan G. Weichinger via samba wrote: > I run 2 DCs at a site, Debian 12.5, so far samba-4.19.6 from backports. > > Today I upgraded one of them, this brought samba-4.20.1 > > Now on this one DC stuff like "wbinfo -g" fails: > > # wbinfo -g > could not obtain winbind interface details: WBC_ERR_WINBIND_NOT_AVAILABLE > could not obtain

07.06.2024 19:27, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 04:59:29PM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >> It boils down to having wide links = yes (and unix extensions = no). > > Wide links is problematic. I'd love to just remove it :-). I don't see anything problematic in wide links. I'd say it's samba who views it as problematic (just like in a

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 08:21:26PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: >But samba applies too much smartness here and breaks things badly. 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

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

I run 2 DCs at a site, Debian 12.5, so far samba-4.19.6 from backports. Today I upgraded one of them, this brought samba-4.20.1 Now on this one DC stuff like "wbinfo -g" fails: # wbinfo -g could not obtain winbind interface details: WBC_ERR_WINBIND_NOT_AVAILABLE could not obtain winbind domain name! failed to call wbcListGroups: WBC_ERR_WINBIND_NOT_AVAILABLE Error looking up domain

Hi! In the samba wiki there's this page: https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Raising_the_Functional_Levels which basically says that the maximum supported functional level is 2008_R2, and that 2012 (and 2012_R2) are included but not supported. This page mentions maximum samba version 4.4 and has been modified in 2017 (besides some formatting changes). What's the current situation? Also,

06.06.2024 19:33, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > For quite some time I'm trying to find what's going on with MSDFS referrals. > Samba version is 4.19.6. .. > However, when opening the directory in question from client, this name is not > shown in the listing.? Samba skips this name from the listing when looping over > readdir entries: So, the same config just works in