notforward 425083 thanks On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 11:01:13PM +0200, Ralph Passgang wrote:
> > Also maybe provide what Jim McDonough suggested ; > > > > "Please do include a trace. I'm curious as to why you would get 64-bit > > time_t on a 32-bit system. Can you include a 'net sam policy show "max > > password age"', or on the older samba a 'pdbedit -C "max password age"' > > (the latter should work on the newer one as well) ?" > > I think two bug-reports got mixed up... I never had the "64-bit time_t on > 32-bit system" problem. But trying to lookup the policy for the password > expiration time helped a lot. Agreed, these are not the same bug. Dropping the 'forwarded' tag. > Knowing that 3.0.24 and before seems to ignore the max password age and > simply using 30 years for all users, and 3.0.25 for the first time really > uses this value I changed that with pdbedit: Yes, I don't understand why this wasn't used previously; but: > I am not sure where (my) default of 356 seconds came from, but when it's > the default on every debian machine with samba, then you probably should > change that to "never" / -1 for samba >= 3.0.25. It's not the default on every Debian machine with samba. I have Debian systems with samba installed where the pdb was first created with samba < 3.0, and systems where it was created with samba 3.0.24; and none of my systems show this issue. So I would say that, given that the current behavior appears to be correct, this is not a bug and the report can remain closed. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
