Simon Hobson wrote:
Chris Ricks wrote:
And what does the vendor propose to do about the problem of changing
a binary whilst it is in use ? Having said that, I have done in-place
upgrades on Unix systems by MOVING the original file and slipping the
new one into place - if it's in use then the
Harmon, Leigh wrote:
All,
Is there a limit on the number of symbolic links that Samba follows correctly.
I'm running Samba 3.0.1 on Solaris 8, and using Samba as a file server. I've
tested 3.0.2 and have the same issue. On the Unix side, I have a directory that
contains many symbolic links to
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
oplocks do not override fcntl locks - but clients that have successfully
gained an oplock might not ask for an SMB lock, and therefore Samba
might not attempt to gain the matching fcntl() lock.
Would strict locking avoid that locking hole by setting the fcntl lock
upon
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 10:54:32PM -0600, tvsjr wrote:
At 02:41 PM 01/26/2004 -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
I ran the same 3.0.1-2-debug1 under valgrind to get this output.
I only ran it for a short period of time because samba is giving access
denied errors that it doesn't when not being traced
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 06:10:35PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 15:19, Mike Fedyk wrote:
Hmm, do I need to compile my libc non-stripped, or is the problem in
tdb/tdb.c:1498?
It's not there. it's somewhere else - set MALLOC_CHECK_=2 into your
environment
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 02:05:42PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
Mike,
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:29:33AM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:10:40AM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
I'm still looking through my logs to see if there are any new traces there.
All clients
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 12:16:29PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
I have a custom smb.conf file which I'm attaching, and have just added:
panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action
Well, I figured out it should have been
panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d
But unfortunately I get
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:02:59PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 12:16:29PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
I have a custom smb.conf file which I'm attaching, and have just added:
panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action
Well, I figured out it should have been
panic
BACKTRACE: 3 stack frames:
#0 /usr/sbin/smbd(smb_panic+0x101) [0x81bdcb1]
#1 /usr/sbin/smbd [0x81ac097]
#2 [0xe420]
I've been getting a lot of these now that I have the non-stripped version of
samba running.
I'm still looking through my logs to see if there are any new traces
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:10:40AM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
I'm still looking through my logs to see if there are any new traces there.
All clients are win2k, except for scitex which is win98.
And here are some more:
comp.team-c-jhernand-[2004/01/20 16:15:29, 0] lib/util.c:smb_panic(1408
On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 04:54:12PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 06:15:47PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
Ok, then, you *must* build debugging-enabled packages by running... :)
The binaries are compiled with debugging turned on -- the debugging
symbols are stripped out
-0800
From: Mike Fedyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Samba ML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd: Samba semantics error?
Mail-Followup-To: Samba ML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
X-Spam-DCC: :
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on
fileserver.matchmail.com
X
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 08:46:48PM +, Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:49:30PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02:21PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Under windows, I don't think you can delete a 'read only' file.
Samba takes the missing 'w
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 08:06, Gerry Kirk wrote:
Mike Fedyk wrote:
Did you check the eventlog on the win2k server? You might see something
helpful there.
This is the message:
The session setup from
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 12:25:52PM -0500, Gerry Kirk wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the setup defined for my RH9 box to participate in a Win2000
domain. I have server = domain, etc. This has been working fine for
several months.
As of this morning, one user can no longer access samba shares. His
15 matches
Mail list logo
