On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Pierre Belanger wrote: > I found the following message (June 2002). > > http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/2002-June/037434.html > > I read the whole thread. Any new comments? I will try to find > a solution from what I read unless there are new ideas? > > Thanx to google and sorry not to search on google before posting here.
I don't think there is anything new to add yet. As I recall there was a general consensus that a solution is highly desirable, but also that it must be "clean". Our proposed solution would also add functionality such as letting UNIX commands "write(1)", "wall(1)" etc. work fully. We agreed on what the possible components of this might be. But this is to be a combination of a few things, which were not yet in existence, such as "session exec" and/or PAM hooks. (The write/wall would then extend to Samba's control/event loop, which has some sensitive interactions.) In the meantime, Andrew Bartlett suggested a workaround. (And I think both he and I would say "AT YOUR OWN RISK" in capital letters.) This was in the middle of his follow-up message on the thread: http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/2002-June/037435.html (There is a minor typo in his suggestion there: "/dev/smbd/1" should read "/dev/smb/1".) Disclaimer: I have not tried this! Hope that helps. -- : David Lee I.T. Service : : Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : University of Durham : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ South Road : : Durham : : Phone: +44 191 374 2882 U.K. :
