Dear list,
Is there a reason for not having use sendfile= true in default
configuration for 3.6 or 4.0 ?
Regards,
Dragos
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Did samba build with acl support ?
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Gregory Sloop gr...@sloop.net wrote:
GK it's not only your file system supporting ACL's - also some
GK devel packages must be around during the build.
GK See https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_4/OS_Requirements
GS
This seems more a routing issue to me than samba.
Packets cannot move between different networks without a route.
You need to define a static route between your networks and then it will
work.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:
There are too many possible causes to tell with only these details.
I would try inotify on the samba box to determine what is the process
causing the change.
If its the samba process that is doing the change I would look at the
Windows box process list.
Procmon might help you
Besides what Jeremy suggested I think it can be solved on the client side
with:
Word Options - Trust Center - Trust Center Settings -
1. Trusted locations: Check Allow trusted locations..
2. Trusted documents: Check Allow documents on a network to be trusted
3. Protected view: Uncheck fist 2.
In order for all PAM management types to be used you need to disable
encryption on both Samba server and client.
Dragos
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Arokux B. aro...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am using pam_group.so to add some additional groups to the users.
However, although Samba obeys
, May 22, 2012 at 02:12:02PM +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote:
Seems resonable, zfsacl stores the ACE's natively compared to acl_xattr
that makes
use of extended attributes.
It seems that the big players (Oracle, IBM) made their own tools.
Any idea of the strict mapping completeness among
Thanks Jonathan,
I missed that.
So, zfsacl is provided by Oracle.
Should I favor acl_xattr besides zfsacl ?
Dragos
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Jonathan Buzzard jonat...@buzzard.me.ukwrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 09:18 +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote:
Dear list,
Setup is: Solaris 11
this issue ?
Dragos
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Jonathan Buzzard
jonat...@buzzard.me.ukwrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 12:34 +0300, Pacher Dragos wrote:
Thanks Jonathan,
I missed that.
So, zfsacl is provided by Oracle.
I have no idea as I don't use Solaris
Should I favor
Dear list,
Setup is: Solaris 11 ZFS + Samba 3.5.10
What is the recommended way nowadays of performing strict permissions
mapping between Samba and Windows NT 6.1 ?
And a more broader question: is it desirable ?
As we know ZFS has native NFSv4 ACL's and this would mean that permissions
applied
10 matches
Mail list logo
