[Samba] Can't get 'root preexec' to run

[Ole Traupe]

No. You don't actually seem to reed what I am writing. I pointed out 
that in the two scenarios I described before the [homes] section never 
correctly comes into play.

Lets forget about the Windows part. ADUC is not creating the share as 
the respective user and would just mess things up.

Lets focus on the Linux side instead. This [homes] section applies if 
you try to access a share that doesn't exist - then that is created. But 
on the other side, Unix users can only access something that is already 
locally mounted - e.g. the home directory base folder (\\server\home 
would it be addressed by Windows). So the user logging on to a domain 
member server accesses something locally mounted to e.g. /home. So this 
share already exists. Ergo, the [homes] section on the file server won't 
come into play at all.

The only way this could work would be, if the user himself would mount 
his personal share directly at logon. And this could be accomplished via 
a logon script in the netlogon share OR a second 'root preexec' in the 
[netlogon] section of smb.conf - both on the DC (the latter even 
involving remote ssh mount commands executed on the domain member 
server). But this seems awfully complicated to me and I wouldn't think 
this is the intended use (which I am trying to figure out).

So I actually would like to ask one of the devs: how is this meant to be 
used?


Am 22.10.2015 um 16:00 schrieb Rowland Penny:
> On 22/10/15 14:35, Ole Traupe wrote:
>> So you are suggesting to use the 'root preexec' parameter to try to 
>> map a non-existing share in order to have the Samba file server 
>> create it.
>>
>> This time, this 'root preexec' is in which smb.conf section on what 
>> server? My DC is not the server hosting the homes.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The title of this thread is: [Samba] Can't get 'root preexec' to run
>
> You now seem to have got the share '[homes]' working but have found 
> that by using 'root preexec' your script is being run by the 'root' 
> user. I was just pointing out that there is another command called 
> 'preexec' and as an aside, just who did you think was going run a 
> command run from something called 'root preexec' ????
>
> Rowland
>