On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Jim Klimov jimkli...@cos.ru wrote:
I might suggest an alternative solution, which may be an overkill for
a single fileserver, but is rather widely employed in heterogenous
shops: fire up a naming service (such as LDAP), and the fileserver
would be its client.
I am not sure if all of my comment is true and valid, but *I think*
that SAMBA is designed as a more interoperable piece of software -
being a userland program, it is more extensible. And likely it can
implement what you desire from an OpenSolaris server in a more
consistent and comfortable way
2012-08-13 21:11, Günther Alka пишет:
with SAMBA and winbind you may loose:
- snaps via Windows previous version
Also, I forgot to mention that with both kernel CIFS and SAMBA
you can access a share's (hidden or exposed) .zfs/snapshots
directory (if the share is the root of a ZFS filesystem
I would say, OpenIndiana/ Solaris (as a fileserver) is useless without its
Windows compatible
Snap, ACL and CIFS features. These are the killer arguments to use OI/
Solaris widely - the most compatible
Windows-server on Unix.
I think the only thing you're missing moving to SAMBA+winbindd
The problem that must be solved:
a File created from CIFS must have the same owner SID/ ACL/ UID/ GID
like those created with netatalk. (interoperabiity)
The thing is that surely that's an API or system level requirement - it
shouldn't be up to each server application to reverse-engineer what
with SAMBA and winbind you may loose:
- snaps via Windows previous version
- Windows compatible ntfs4 ACL (only Posix ACL ?)
- SMB as a ZFS property
- interoperability with NFS4
- movable pools that keep ACL intact
- performance, kernel based CIFS server is mostly faster
- CIFS is managed by
2012/8/13 Günther Alka a...@hfg-gmuend.de:
with SAMBA and winbind you may loose:
- snaps via Windows previous version
- Windows compatible ntfs4 ACL (only Posix ACL ?)
- SMB as a ZFS property
- interoperability with NFS4
- movable pools that keep ACL intact
- performance, kernel based CIFS
2012/8/11 Gea a...@hfg-gmuend.de:
Frank Lahm franklahm at gmail.com writes:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.ross at gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Frank Lahm franklahm at gmail.com
wrote:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.ross at gmail.com:
[...]
If you setup idmap to use
On 12.08.2012 19:42, Frank Lahm wrote:
*sigh*
I was just giving a pointer to some doc I have spent considerable time
and effort to provide a consolidated ressource for anybody facing this
problem.
You may notice that using idmu is one the things explained in great length.
Feel free to add links
I might suggest an alternative solution, which may be an overkill for
a single fileserver, but is rather widely employed in heterogenous
shops: fire up a naming service (such as LDAP), and the fileserver
would be its client. idmap mappings can be set up to map Windows
users not to ephemeral IDs,
Frank Lahm franklahm at gmail.com writes:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.ross at gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Frank Lahm franklahm at gmail.com
wrote:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.ross at gmail.com:
[...]
If you setup idmap to use IDMU, then you'll get the UID/GID
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:25 AM, James Relph ja...@themacplace.co.uk wrote:
I've got a server hooked up to a 2003 AD and CIFS and netatalk are both
allowing AD users to login (netatalk 3 via PAM). One thing that's a bit
puzzling is that the afpd process correctly gets the correct username
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.r...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:25 AM, James Relph ja...@themacplace.co.uk wrote:
I've got a server hooked up to a 2003 AD and CIFS and netatalk are both
allowing AD users to login (netatalk 3 via PAM). One thing that's a bit
puzzling is that the afpd
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Frank Lahm frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.r...@gmail.com:
[...]
If you setup idmap to use IDMU, then you'll get the UID/GID values
provided by AD, which are presumably the same values your other LDAP
clients will get from AD. :)
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.r...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Frank Lahm frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/8/10 Gordon Ross gordon.w.r...@gmail.com:
[...]
If you setup idmap to use IDMU, then you'll get the UID/GID values
provided by AD, which are presumably the same values
I've got a server hooked up to a 2003 AD and CIFS and netatalk are both
allowing AD users to login (netatalk 3 via PAM). One thing that's a bit
puzzling is that the afpd process correctly gets the correct username mapping
(and shows up as being owned by the correct user with a ps listing),
Hi,
I've got a server hooked up to a 2003 AD and CIFS and netatalk are both
allowing AD users to login (netatalk 3 via PAM). One thing that's a bit
puzzling is that the afpd process correctly gets the correct username mapping
(and shows up as being owned by the correct user with a ps
17 matches
Mail list logo
