Le vendredi 19 août 2011 à 06:51 -0500, John H Terpstra a écrit : > On 08/19/2011 03:54 AM, David Touzeau wrote: > > Le jeudi 18 août 2011 à 13:26 +0200, Benedikt Schindler a écrit : > > > >> Am 18.08.2011 06:07, schrieb John H Terpstra: > >>> On 08/17/2011 02:05 PM, David Touzeau wrote: > >>>> I think this new version is not really ready for production... > >>>> There is so many strange things... Or misunderstanding whats going wrong > >>> > >>> I respect that some may be experiencing difficulties with deployment of > >>> Samba 3.6.0. > >>> > >>> I have been using 3.6.0 in its various pre-release forms (and now the > >>> stable release) for many months without a single problem. I have > >>> deployed it in some very complex as well as some simple configurations - > >>> all without any issues. > >>> > >>> The purpose of this response is to point out that Samba 3.6.0 is perhaps > >>> not as "not really ready" for production use readers of this list may > >>> interpret from these reports. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> John T. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Le lundi 15 août 2011 à 14:07 -0700, Linda W a écrit : > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ` Peacock,Josh wrote: > >>>>>> I am also experiencing the same problems. I am running 3.6 on AIX > >>>>>> 6.1. I do have a 3.5.8 installation running without problem (I > >>>>>> understand some major changes have happened.) I took the smb.conf > >>>>>> from my 3.5.8 install and changed appropriately for 3.6 (At least as > >>>>>> far as I catell). > >>>>>> > >>>>> ---- > >>>>> Yeah, I still have this error even after downgrading to 3.5.10 -- > >>>>> I think 3.6 corrupted my userdb or changed the format... I suppose > >>>>> I need to allocate a new one and start from scratch to fix it... > >>>>> > >>>>> But lots of problems related to looking up the domain, the > >>>>> PDC and some users. > >>>>> > >>>>> I did try to report it, but since I wasn't certain what was going on and > >>>>> just had a bunch of random symptoms, I got ignored. > >>>>> > >>>>> But I did warn them that other users would likely have problems and > >>>>> should > >>>>> be warned... That was ignored too.. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> I had the same error until today. It works for me with base_rid = 0 > >> > >> TRY: > >> > >> idmap config MYDOMAIN : backend = rid > >> idmap config MYDOMAIN : range = 60000-50000000 > >> idmap config MYDOMAIN : base_rid = 0 > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Benedikt > > > > > > i have set > > idmap config MYDOMAIN : backend = ad > > > > Is there any difference using > > > > idmap config MYDOMAIN : backend = rid > > > > instead > > > > idmap config MYDOMAIN : backend = ad > > > > When using Active Directory ? > > > > > > > > > > Check the man pages (man idmap_rid) and (man idmap_ad): > > The RID method generates the uid/gid from the RID. As a result all users > in Active Directory can access the Samba server. > > The AD method requires the use of the RFC2307bis extensions to the > Active Directory schema and that you populate the uid and gid in with > valid values using the Active Directory Users and Group management tool. > If you have not populated the RFC2307bis uid/gid values the user will > not be able to access the Samba server. > > Using the AD method the systems administrator has control over which > users can and cannot access the Samba server/s. > > - John T.
Good !! And what method did you suggest for better compatibilities and your experiences...? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
