Hi,
here're the latest diffs between HEAD and 3_0 (docu is excluded here, I
think it should be completely in sync, sam/gums stuff shouldn't be in 3_0...)
I think all small fixes should synced...and maybe all big patches two:-)
jelmer:Recognize FreeBSD5 correctly (not as being sysv...)
Files
Hi,
By inspection with od -ha etc, I can see much of the format of NTUSER.DAT.
The early part has, in UNICODE, CRLF (sic) delimited lines, it seems.
Anyway, a little way through has the line $$$PROTO.HIV and then a little
further on are the SIDS, in the format:
LEN of this desc 2
×ð¾´µÄÐÂÀÏ¿Í»§£º
ÄúºÃ£¬ÎÒ¹«Ë¾ÓŻݲúÆ·ÒѽøÈë×îºóµ¹Êý30Ì죬30Ììºó¼Û¸ñ½«Éϵ÷£¬Óû¹º´ÓËÙ£º
ΪºÎÎÒÃÇ»áÔÙÉϵ÷¼Û¸ñÄØ£¬ÕâÖ÷ÒªÊÇÎÒÃÇ·þÎñÆ÷ÅäÖÃÔ½À´Ô½ºÃ£¬Ëٶȼ«¿ì£¡
1¡¢200M£¨´¿HTML¿Õ¼ä£©+ ËÍÒ»¹ú¼ÊÓòÃû£¬½öÊÛ150Ôª/Äê
2¡¢60M¿Õ¼ä+60MÆóÒµÓÊ¾Ö + Ö§³ÖASP£¬CGI + ËÍÒ»¹ú¼ÊÓòÃû£¬½öÊÛ236Ôª/Äê
I have to be glad when received mailling list about samba-technical, but i
worry about my inbox capacity, I have small size of mailbox so can't receive
more e-mail.
Please remove my e-mail address from your mailling list. I will access to
your site and look for documents when i need.
Thank
Jay Ts [mailto:jay;jayts.cx] said: [excerpt]
I know this is a tough issue, and I'm not sure what I'd
do if I were in the driver's seat. Perhaps as a
minimum, adding some documentation to the /docs directory,
as Chris suggests, and also putting lines in the example
smb.conf files showing how
Hello,
attached are small patches for makerpms.sh.tmpl and samba2.spec.tmpl which
allow compiling installing samba rpms on RedHat 8 (hope this is the right
place to submit them).
o tarfile: allow samba-${VERSION} to be a symlink to another directory
(e.g. plain samba)
o Use rpmbuild instead
On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 02:14:54PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
I was wondering, would you have time to look at the netlogon unigroup
issue again?
I'll add this to TODO list. I finally have an arragement to dedicate
up to 8-16 hrs of work time per week to Samba development during next
several
You hit it _on_the_nose_ here. We wish someone had
commented in the smb.conf, the manpages, the
documents, ANYWHERE, about potential
corruption/slowness with large database files and
OpLocks. There is a chance we would have been spared
grief.
/dev/idal
--- Jay Ts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Green, Paul [mailto:Paul.Green;stratus.com]
My opinion is that the right fix is for anyone who is
experiencing data corruption of any sort, whether with oplocks on, off, or
sideways, to work with the Samba team to come up with a reproducible test
case
--- Green, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My opinion is that the right fix is for anyone who
is experiencing data
corruption of any sort, whether with oplocks on,
off, or sideways, to work
with the Samba team to come up with a reproducible
test case so that we can
root cause the true source
--- David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's rather
shocking to me that SMB reacts
to poorly to network problems, but I realize there's
not much Samba can do
about the crummy protocol design. ;)
There is one thing: (Now I'm beating a dead horse on
this, so I'll shut up and see what I can
-Original Message-
From: Chris de Vidal [mailto:cdevidal;yahoo.com]
--- David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's rather
shocking to me that SMB reacts
to poorly to network problems, but I realize there's
not much Samba can do
about the crummy protocol design. ;)
I have a server Unix with Samba version 2.0.6 and a server NT version 4.0,
they are connected on a unique domain.
The share directories are in the Unix server and the users - the groups
(global and local) are in the NT Server.
I don't kwnow how is it possible to give access to the shared folders
Hello:
I've been following the thread about oplocks recently, and have been waiting
for more info on the (now dormant) thread about Solaris fcntl() issues.
My server is a Sun E-250, 2x400MHz, 1-Gig RAM, lots of storage, samba 2.2.5
1. WinXP logon/logoff is unbearably, excruciatingly,
Quoting Chris de Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The challenge is it doesn't appear to be a problem
with Samba but the clients. Regardless, I feel the
Samba documentation ought to be noted when/if we can
reproduceably show it to be the client's fault, so
others don't fall into the same trap. If
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Brodbeck wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Green, Paul [mailto:Paul.Green;stratus.com]
My opinion is that the right fix is for anyone who is
experiencing data corruption of any sort, whether with oplocks on, off, or
sideways, to work with the Samba
-Original Message-
From: John H Terpstra [mailto:jht;samba.org]
This is a not uncommon finding. I have followed up with many users who
have complained of Linux and / or Samba problems to find that
they were having problems with MS Windows NT so they decided to try
Samba.
That
1. WinXP logon/logoff is unbearably, excruciatingly, painfully, s*l*o*w.
'loading your personal settings' and 'saving your settings' can take
upwards of 10 minutes for some users. In the process, users either get
impatient and forcibly power off their machines/undock their
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 11:50, Andy Bakun wrote:
1. WinXP logon/logoff is unbearably, excruciatingly, painfully, s*l*o*w.
'loading your personal settings' and 'saving your settings' can
take upwards of 10 minutes for some users. In the process, users either
get impatient and
Hello, Group:
I'm not a developer at all, but I follow the list pretty closely to get useful
tips and insight for my samba installations.
Some time ago I saw a question from a list member which was something I had
been wondering myself. There were no responses to that question (I checked
Yep. I know it's *similar* to 'net send'. The thing is that 'net send'
typically starts off by trying to use port 139, connecting to the 03
NetBIOS name.
From other messages I have received, I also understand that there is an
MS-RPC call that handle's messaging. The spammers are using this
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:38:57AM -0400, Len Laughridge wrote:
Hello:
I've been following the thread about oplocks recently, and have been waiting
for more info on the (now dormant) thread about Solaris fcntl() issues.
My server is a Sun E-250, 2x400MHz, 1-Gig RAM, lots of storage,
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:09:11PM +1030, Richard Sharpe wrote:
Hi,
Are people aware of this?
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009899899/toc.htm
Yes, I printed it out a long time ago :-).
Jeremy.
Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 02:14:54PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
I was wondering, would you have time to look at the netlogon unigroup
issue again?
I'll add this to TODO list. I finally have an arragement to dedicate
up to 8-16 hrs of work time per week to Samba
Steve Langasek wrote:
It appears that in Samba 3.0, the meaning of ldap ssl = start tls is
somewhat diluted. First, the start tls command is only ever issued if
the given ldapsam URI has a protocol string of ldaps://, which is
definitely an issue -- TLS is quite a different protocol from
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:15:46AM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
It appears that in Samba 3.0, the meaning of ldap ssl = start tls is
somewhat diluted. First, the start tls command is only ever issued if
the given ldapsam URI has a protocol string of ldaps://, which is
definitely an
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:15:46AM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
It appears that in Samba 3.0, the meaning of ldap ssl = start tls is
somewhat diluted. First, the start tls command is only ever issued if
the given ldapsam URI has a protocol string of ldaps://,
Gareth Davies wrote:
Original Message -
From: Christopher R. Hertel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A curious article:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,55795,00.html
It says that the Messenger Service Spammers are using port 135, which
means that they're not using regular WinPOPUP stuff
At 09:33 29.10.2002 -0500, you wrote:
Thanks for doing this...can I ask how you did it? I'm not so good at cvs.
I just have to tree's and run 'diff --brief HEAD 3_0'
then I looked up each file in http://cvs.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/samba/source/
but I think I can write a little script that
Hi,
In looking at NTUSER.DAT, it seems that the permissions associated with
some of the SIDs are:
0x000f003f
Hmmm, here is one of the entries:
0x0014 003f 000f 0101 0005 0012
Which seems to be:
ACCESS Denied, No Propogate Inherit, All Access, S-1-5-4608
Does this seem
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Richard Sharpe wrote:
Hi,
In looking at NTUSER.DAT, it seems that the permissions associated with
some of the SIDs are:
0x000f003f
Hmmm, here is one of the entries:
0x0014 003f 000f 0101 0005 0012
Which seems to be:
ACCESS Denied, No
Collins, Kevin wrote:
Hi All:
Excuse me for butting in here, but I'm planning a migration from WinNT 4
to Samba in the near future and this thread has caused me to worry a
little.
Take the case that I'm planning: 3 Domains each to its own LAN
(connected via 128k Frame Relay lines to
Andrew Barlett wrote:
Domain trusts (in terms of us being a PDC trusting other DCs) are
currenetly a work in progress. We hope to have it finished for Samba
3.0.
However, why do you need domain trusts? (There are lots of
good answers
to this question, but make sure you do have one of
Steven Langasek wrote:
Having one PDC and two BDCs also gives you greater
fault-tolerance than
having three domains with a single PDC each.
Samba+LDAP can give you this fault tolerance; it can't give you trust
relationships today, without a lot of finagling.
Steve Langasek
postmodern
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:10:22AM -0500, Collins, Kevin wrote:
Steven Langasek wrote:
Having one PDC and two BDCs also gives you greater
fault-tolerance than
having three domains with a single PDC each.
Samba+LDAP can give you this fault tolerance; it can't give you trust
There's another poor man way.
Use the classic smbpasswd file and use rsync to sync the file
periodically with a cron (of course you'll miss the ability to have
things promptly synced but generally this is a good enough solution for
many environments).
Simo.
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 17:23, Steve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
The locks you see here are used by MS Office as semaphores.
No one really knows why (well the MS Office programmers do,
but they're not telling :-).
Thank s! That explains that.
But I expected to see locks for the whole of
the file for the duration of the MS-Word
37 matches
Mail list logo
