The first patch is at least in Samba 4.2 and newer. The patch to the
vfs_gpfs module is only in Samba 4.3 and newer. So any of these should fix
your problem:
- Add the vfs_gpfs patch to the source code of Samba 4.2.9 and recompile
the code.
- Upgrade to Sernet Samba 4.3.x or newer
- Change t
9G4HTGTB kk38ģvv
On 6 Jul 2016 15:46, "Christof Schmitt" wrote:
>
> The message in the trace confirms that this is triggered by:
> https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=4
>
> I 2asuspect that the Samba version used misses the patch
>
https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=fd
By the way, we are planning to go to CES / 4.2.x in a matter of weeks, but
understanding this problem was quite important for me. Perhaps knowing now that
the fix is probably to install a different version of Samba, we’ll probably
leave it alone.
Thank you everyone for your help,
Richard
From
I’m afraid it’s not a typo ☺
[root@server gpfs]# rpm -qa | grep sernet
sernet-samba-ctdb-tests-4.2.9-19.el6.x86_64
sernet-samba-common-4.2.9-19.el6.x86_64
sernet-samba-winbind-4.2.9-19.el6.x86_64
sernet-samba-ad-4.2.9-19.el6.x86_64
sernet-samba-libs-4.2.9-19.el6.x86_64
sernet-samba-4.2.9-19.el6.x8
Hi Richard,
Is that a typo in the version? We’re also using Sernet Samba but we’ve got
4.3.9…
Kevin
On Jul 6, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Sobey, Richard A
mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk>> wrote:
Cheers Christof. We're using Sernet Samba [4.2.9] so limited by what they
release. How can I identify which
Cheers Christof. We're using Sernet Samba [4.2.9] so limited by what they
release. How can I identify which version of Samba is a) affect by the the
first link and b) which version has got the patch incorporated?
I'm not a developer as you can guess :)
-Original Message-
From: gpfsug-di
The message in the trace confirms that this is triggered by:
https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=acbb4ddb6876c15543c5370e6d27faacebc8a231
I suspect that the Samba version used misses the patch
https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=fdbca5e13a0375d7f18639679a627e67c3df647
Thanks Daniel – sorry to be dense, but does this indicate working as intended,
or a bug? I assume the former. So, the question still remains how has this
suddenly broken, when:
[root@server ict]# mmgetacl -k nfs4 .snapshots/
.snapshots/: Operation not permitted
…appears to be the correct output
Looking at recent patches to SAMBA I see from December 2015:https://download.samba.org/pub/samba/patches/security/samba-4.1.21-security-2015-12-16.patch,(link found at https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11658 which includes the comment:
Failing that, smbd_check_access_rights should check
Sure. It might be easier if I just post the entire smb.conf:
[global]
netbios name = store
workgroup = IC
security = ads
realm = IC.AC.UK
kerberos method = secrets and keytab
vfs objects = shadow_copy2 syncops gpfs fileid
ea support = yes
store dos attributes = yes
map
Can you cut/paste your full VFS options for gpfs and shadow copy from
smb.conf?
On 06/07/2016 10:37, Sobey, Richard A wrote:
Quick followup on this. Doing some more samba debugging (i.e.
increasing log levels!) and come up with the following:
[2016/07/06 10:07:35.602080, 3]
../source3/sm
Quick followup on this. Doing some more samba debugging (i.e. increasing log
levels!) and come up with the following:
[2016/07/06 10:07:35.602080, 3] ../source3/smbd/vfs.c:1322(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: admin/ict/serviceoperations/slough_project/Slough_Layout
reduced to
/gpfs
12 matches
Mail list logo
