hi again :)
It's a variant of the same problem but has been
exacerbated by the change from string comparisons
to token based access checks for smb.conf parameters.
stupid question: so why did you change to token based access check at
all? what were/are samba-internal reasons to do this?
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:05:26AM +0200, Michael Gasch wrote:
stupid question: so why did you change to token based access check at
all? what were/are samba-internal reasons to do this?
Lots :-)
We had all sorts of access check variants all over the code,
all working slightly differently. So
first, thx volker!
consider this case:
valid users = DOMAIN\test DOMAIN\test
DOMAIN\test is a user and a group (don´t ask why ;) )
members of the group DOMAIN\test would never be able to logon to this
share, right?
There's no way in Windows that I know to have DOMAIN\test to
be a user and a
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:02:24AM +0200, Michael Gasch wrote:
well, this was kind of mind game:
i have a samba PDC with a group test and a user test. this works fine
for the DC (tested). how would samba on a member solve this issue, if
smbclient connects (no windows involved)?
Sorry to say
ok, understand :)
i just wanted to find out the way samba would solve this issue if
there´s a user and a group with the same name. if i´d ever face this
problem, i would rename either of them.
thx!
micha
Volker Lendecke wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:02:24AM +0200, Michael Gasch wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Gasch wrote:
hi again :)
It's a variant of the same problem but has been
exacerbated by the change from string comparisons
to token based access checks for smb.conf parameters.
stupid question: so why did you change to token based
hi jerry,
i thought this would never get fixed, because i think i hit the same
problem already last year.
[Samba] [Problem] Samba v3 Errors when group and user exists with same
name]
jerry said:
| i have a user called biblio and a group called biblio
| normally this is no problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Gasch wrote:
i thought this would never get fixed, because i think
i hit the same problem already last year.
jerry said:
Windows won't allow a user and groupw ith the same name.
Not much we can do about that. However, if you
We have a Linux user and group with the same name (username prox,
group name prox) and a Samba share with force user = prox set.
Since upgrading from Samba 3.0.21b to Samba 3.0.23a, that share no
longer works. smbclient gives the following error when connecting to
the share:
tree connect
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josh,
We have a Linux user and group with the same name
(username prox, group name prox) and a Samba share
with force user = prox set. Since upgrading from Samba
3.0.21b to Samba 3.0.23a, that share no longer works.
smbclient gives the
On 8/7/06, Gerald (Jerry) Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh,
So Samba no longer likes having a user and group
by the same name. Is this an intentional change
in Samba 3.0.23, or is it a bug? I don't
remember seeing anything about it in the release
notes.
We think that we have this
11 matches
Mail list logo
