similar to: Upgrade from 4.13 to 4.20 failed

/etc/resolv.conf (Both DC's (windows) listed) domain ho-pla.se search ho-pla.se nameserver 10.0.2.10 nameserver 10.0.2.64 /etc/krb5.conf [libdefaults] dns_lookup_realm = false dns_lookup_kdc = true default_realm = HO-PLA.SE On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:01?PM Luis Peromarta via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > What?s the content of krb conf file and resolv.conf?

What?s the content of krb conf file and resolv.conf? Your smb.conf file looks good and tidy to me. On 6 Aug 2024 at 20:42 +0200, Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>, wrote: > Hello > I have an older Debian 11 with Samba 4.13 as domain member serving som > industrial systems with files. > Today I decided to upgrade both Debian (to 12) and Samba (to 4.17 and >

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 20:41:51 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hello > I have an older Debian 11 with Samba 4.13 as domain member serving som > industrial systems with files. > Today I decided to upgrade both Debian (to 12) and Samba (to 4.17 and > then 4.20). The upgrade using the backport repo worked after some > extra steps. Som

Rowland, you nailed it. I had both libpam and libnss installed, but they were not automatically upgraded together witn winbind and samba. They were still on 4.17 from the staged upgrade, but now updated to 4.20. And the shares are working again! Amazing :) Thanks Anders On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:19?PM Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Aug 2024

I wrote a message a couple of days ago asking about Samba and SMB protocol levels on an old industrial robot with a pre-2010 Samba. That was resolved successfully. I now have another question concerning the same systems (the robots and the new Samba server, HP-SRV03). root at hp-srv03:/ *smbclient -L localhost -U administrator* Enter HPLTS\administrator's password: Sharename Type

On Fri, 3 May 2024 15:19:01 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > I wrote a message a couple of days ago asking about Samba and SMB > protocol levels on an old industrial robot with a pre-2010 Samba. > That was resolved successfully. I now have another question > concerning the same systems (the robots and the new Samba server, > HP-SRV03). >

Agreed, I will keep the NT1 share on a separate VM and create a new one for the other services. Air-gapping will be difficult though, but I will check what can be done. Thanks On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:20?AM Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:08:24 +0200 > Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >

On Mon, 6 May 2024 09:06:36 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi > Some may remember that I asked about configuring a Samba server for > the legacy NT1 protocol due to a couple of old industrial systems > that do not support SMB2/3. > I noticed this today from the Samba server, probably doesnt mean > anything but I still would like to ask

On Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:08:24 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Is it possible to have the "min client protocol" statements per share, > or must they be global? I take you meant 'client min protocol', that is a global setting and cannot be per share. > > I am asking since I have the NT1 limit on a specific Samba server with

HiWe have two Windows servers (one active, one standby) that we keep in sync by using ROBOCOPY to do a differential copy every night. The options make sure that only new or altered files are transferred, and deleted ?master? files also is deleted on the standby server. Now I want to relocate a couple of shares from the active server to a Samba 4.20 server. The shares are up and working as they

Actually, I made it work by adding the ?min server protocol = NT1? on the virtual dedicated server. So I guess that this will solve our dilemma (unless I missed something). In any case, one of the robots now have access to the new server. Will try the second one as soon as I get a chance (they are busy bending steel ;:) ) Anders > On 11 Apr 2024, at 14:55, Rowland Penny via samba <samba

Hi Some may remember that I asked about configuring a Samba server for the legacy NT1 protocol due to a couple of old industrial systems that do not support SMB2/3. I noticed this today from the Samba server, probably doesnt mean anything but I still would like to ask the group. The server is of course joined to a domain and operates as it should. sysman at hp-srv03:~$ *net domain testjoin -U

Is it possible to have the "min client protocol" statements per share, or must they be global? I am asking since I have the NT1 limit on a specific Samba server with a share for an industrial robot with an ancient Linux/Samba implementation , but there are other shares on the same server that should be better protected with SMB3. Best regards -- ------ -------------------- 8

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:38:51 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > I have a customer with a couple of industrial robots running Linux > 2.6.34 and Samba 3.4.7 (smbclient -V). They are able to connect to > SMB shares on Windows servers IF I "allow unsafe connections?, ie > lower the SMB minimum level. The servers are on Windows 2019, and >

I am not convinced that it's a Samba issue, but someone might be able to answer anyway We replicate directories and files from a Windows 2019 server to two destinations, both are supposed to be used in case of a disaster, but are also used for some specific tasks. One of the replication targets is a physical Windows 2012 server and the other one an Ubuntu/Samba virtual machine. The Samba VM

I have a customer with a couple of industrial robots running Linux 2.6.34 and Samba 3.4.7 (smbclient -V). They are able to connect to SMB shares on Windows servers IF I "allow unsafe connections?, ie lower the SMB minimum level. The servers are on Windows 2019, and this setup has worked for a couple of years now. I have created a virtual Debian/Samba 4.19 server with the intention of moving

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:57 AM Rowland penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On 30/06/2020 10:34, Anders ?stling wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:24 AM Rowland penny via samba > > <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> On 30/06/2020 09:50, Anders ?stling wrote: > >> > >>>> You have 'workgroup = HPLTS' and

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:24 AM Rowland penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On 30/06/2020 09:50, Anders ?stling wrote: > > >> You have 'workgroup = HPLTS' and 'idmap config dg11', again, they must match > > As I wrote in the previous reply, that was a mistake from the initial > > deployment. However, I have a copy of the VM and

Hi all I have setup a Samba server for a client, and most things work fine (except a strange problem with some clients and SMB1). However, when I created the virtual server before migrating it to the client, I obviously forgot to change a parameter. [global] netbios name = CLIENTNETBIOSNAME realm = CLIENTNETBIOSNAME.SE workgroup = CLIENTNETBIOSNAME idmap config * : backend = tdb idmap config * :

I have a problem that I am unable to sort out. Maybe someone can assist with advice and troubleshooting. Client computer is Windows 10 Pro with latest updates as of today. Servers are a Windows 2019 Standard (logon and AD server) and a Samba 4.11 running on Ubuntu (domain member. AD account configured with account profile \\hp-fssrv\profiles\<username>. Home directory is mapped to