-----Original Message----- From: Mani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:52:51AM +0530 To Delhi LUG Subject: Re: [ilugd] samba problem with win xp
> The registry key should be > > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Netlogon\Parameters] > "requiresignorseal"=dword:00000000 > "signsecurechannel"=dword:00000000 > > Check if your smb.conf file has the following lines > > > > domain master = yes > > local master = yes > > preferred master = yes > > os level = 255 > > security = user > > domain logons = yes > > > > the "Domain not found" error can be use to some WINS problem, (you can try > adding entries to the LMHOSTS/hosts file of your XP client machine), or some > browse master related problems. The os level = 255 will ensure that the > samba server wins all browse elections. Also have you added any line that > will create a Linux user account for your machine? Check if you have the > following line or something similar. > > > > add user script = /usr/sbin/useradd -d /dev/null -g 100 -s /bin/false -M %u > > > > You can check the "Using Samba" 2'nd edition by O'Rielly, it's available in > html format at the samba site, and is also distributed with samba 3.0 > sources (yes, samba 3.0 sources includes html books for samba 2.2) > > Also check if you have a domain admin group, and that the corresponding > samba users exist. > > I believe you are missing some steps, it would be better if you create a > checklist and check it against the manual you are using. > > > > Regards > > Mani > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kedar Dash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "The Linux-Delhi mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:58 PM > Subject: RE: [ilugd] samba problem with win xp > > > > Thank you very much mani. I am using the registry file which is as follows > > --------------- > > Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 > > > > ; > > ; This registry key is needed for a Windows XP Client to join > > ; and logon to a Samba domain. Note: Samba 2.2.3a contained > > ; this key in a broken format which did nothing to the registry - > > ; however XP reported "registry key imported". If in doubt > > ; check the key by hand with regedit. > > > > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Netlogon\Parameters] > > "requiresignorseal"=dword:00000000 > > ---------------------------------------------- > > i am using samba 2.2XX. the error i am getting is "domain not found". > > waiting for your response. > > kedar > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Mani > > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:04 PM > > To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list > > Subject: Re: [ilugd] samba problem with win xp > > > > > > Dear Kedar, > > You need to tell us much more than that, what error > does > > windows display? Did you check the samba logs? Do they report any errors? > > What registry patch did you apply? Does it look like > > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Netlogon\Parameters] > > "requiresignorseal"=dword:00000000 > > "signsecurechannel"=dword:00000000 > > > > ANd most importantantly are you using samba 3.0 or 2.2xx, and have you > added > > the XP box to the samba domain? > > > > Regards > > Mani > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kedar Dash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "The Linux-Delhi mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:28 AM > > Subject: [ilugd] samba problem with win xp > > > > > > > hi, > > > I am using samba as a domain server and it is working fine with win 98, > > but > > > when i am trying to login from win xp terminal it is not working. I have > > > merged the patch(the regestry file) of win xp but still nothing is > > > happening. > > > > > > can anyone guide me on this. Thanks in advance. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Kedar > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > ilugd mailing list > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ilugd mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ilugd mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd > > Hello Guys! This mail is not in reply to the previous mail but a request to please, please, please ,,,,,,,, start a new thread if it is not in reply or context to the original mail. Also please, please,,,,,,,,,,, do not reply to a hijacked mail i.e. a mail which has been sent in reply to a previous mail, whose subject has been changed, and which has nothing whatsoever to do with the original mail. This practice may discourage the thread hijackers. I am inserting the thread view for your convenience: 570| L|Mon Jan 19| vivek khurana |5.5K| 1 [ilugd] Minutes of meeting (18th January 2004) 571| L|Mon Jan 19| Kishore Bhargava |0.7K| 2 |-> 572| !|Mon Jan 19| Adarsh Kr sharma |0.7K| 3 | `->[ilugd] Red Hat Inc.?s Use of the Fedora Na 573| L|Tue Jan 20| Supreet Sethi |1.7K| 4 `-> 574| L|Tue Jan 20| Kedar Dash |0.4K| 5 |->[ilugd] samba problem with win xp 575| L|Tue Jan 20| Supreet Sethi |0.8K| 6 | |-> 576| L|Tue Jan 20| Kedar Dash |1.3K| 7 | | |-> 577| L|Tue Jan 20| Supreet Sethi |0.7K| 8 | | | `-> 578| L|Tue Jan 20| Yashpal Nagar |1.5K| 9 | | `-> 579| L|Tue Jan 20| Mani |1.3K|10 | |-> 580| L|Tue Jan 20| Kedar Dash |2.4K|11 | | `-> 581|N L|Fri Jan 30| Mani |4.2K|12 | | `-> 582|N L|Fri Jan 30| Gurnish S Anand |5.4K|13 | `*> 583| L|Tue Jan 20| LinuxLingam |3.1K|14 `->Re: [ilugd] Minutes of meeting (18th Januar 584| L|Tue Jan 20| Sudev Barar |0.6K|15 |-> 585| L|Tue Jan 20| Supreet Sethi |1.5K|16 |-> 586| L|Tue Jan 20| LinuxLingam |1.1K|17 | `-> 587| L|Wed Jan 21| Supreet Sethi |2.1K|18 | `-> 588| L|Tue Jan 20| Sudev Barar |0.6K|19 |-> 589| L|Tue Jan 20| Sudev Barar |0.4K|20 `-> Doesn't the thread looks comical and the members who are replying to hijackers as su***. Why s*****, since they fall pray to hijackers who do not make enough efforts to start a new mail as they have to fill the list address manually, and also because these hijackers get their mails dutifully answered by list s***** and don't have to heed mails like these. -- vikram... _______________________________________________ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
