Problems Listing Users

Wed Oct 17 12:39:10 GMT 2001

Hi Jim,

I had the same problem here, but fewer users in my list on Win 98 SE.
Same result in User Manager for Domains on an NT server.  I'm using
passwd, not NIS.  I checked the list of users in my passwd file to the
list in smbpasswd, and found a few minor discrepancies, things like the
user had been deleted from passwd, but not from smbpasswd.  Once I fixed
those, the list of users on the NT server shows up in entirety.  BUT!
Now I get no list at all on Win98SE!  All I get is a error message "You
cannot view a list of users at this time. Try again later."

I've searched the archives with no luck, and have posted to the list
twice and received no response.  My only advice is to examine your
smbpasswd file and your NIS database for inconsistencies.  Good luck,
and if you get any advice that works, please let me know.

Thanks,

Mike McEldowney
Information Systems Director
Delta Regional Medical Center
1400 East Union Street
Greenville, MS 38703

v. 662-334-2075
e. mmceldowney at deltaregional.com

Come and visit us on the web!
www.deltaregional.com

Quote of the Month:  "Not one shred of evidence supports the notion that
life is serious."

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Jarvie [mailto:ntl-linux at ntlworld.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:55 PM
To: samba-ntdom at lists.samba.org
Subject: Problems Listing Users

I have a samba server with a user list of around 1,300 users, mainly 
connected via windows 98 machines (with a few NT).

I'm considering switching on user level access control on the clients - 
the windows 98 machines can then be configured with shares accessible 
only to particular specified users.

However, I find a problem when I do this and attempt to obtain the list 
of users from my Samba 2.2.2 server acting as a PDC (domain logins etc. 
Work OK and have done so for some time).

What I find is that on Windows 98 SE the first 100 users from my 
smbpasswd file are listed and then no more.  i.e. A total of exactly 100

users of the 1300 are shown.

With NT, the password list appears to work correctly - though I've not 
checked every user is shown, there are certainly many more than shown 
with W98.

My password file is based on NIS.

Has anyone else experienced this - or have I missed something which is 
immediately obvious to the list members ?

Jim

A level 1 debug shows :

[2001/10/17 18:40:00, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection(610)
  vmware (172.16.6.88) connect to service tas as user jim (uid=65000, 
gid=59999)[2001/10/17 18:40:00, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection(610)
  vmware (172.16.6.88) connect to service office as user jim (uid=65000,

gid=1)
[2001/10/17 18:40:52, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(293)
  api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 0
[2001/10/17 18:40:52, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(293)
  api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 0

And, turning this up to level 3, the relevant portion is :

[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-5-21-1651842875-601990308-2174710594-3205
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-5-21-1651842875-601990308-2174710594-3203
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-5-21-1651842875-601990308-2174710594-1121
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-1-0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-5-2
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(246)
  se_access_check: also S-1-5-11
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/vfs.c:vfs_init_default(98)
  Initialising default vfs hooks
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(321)
  setting sec ctx (65000, 1) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(326)
  16 user groups:
  1 59999 65533 1029 1024 1095 1035 1026 132 30 1097 1096 133 1102 1101 
60
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/vfs.c:vfs_ChDir(658)
  vfs_ChDir to /tmp
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/service.c:make_connection(610)
  vmware (172.16.6.88) connect to service IPC$ as user jim (uid=65000, 
gid=1) (p[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(321)
  setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_tcon_and_X(397)
  tconX service=ipc$ user=jim
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(860)
  Transaction 8 of length 99
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(667)
  switch message SMBtrans (pid 1846)
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(321)
  setting sec ctx (65000, 1) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(326)
  16 user groups:
  1 59999 65533 1029 1024 1095 1035 1026 132 30 1097 1096 133 1102 1101 
60
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
  trans <\PIPE\LANMAN> data=0 params=19 setup=0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(335)
  named pipe command on <LANMAN> name
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/lanman.c:api_reply(3328)
  Got API command 13 of form <WrLh> <B16BBDz> 
(tdscnt=0,tpscnt=19,mdrcnt=66,mprc[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] 
smbd/lanman.c:api_reply(3332)
  Doing RNetServerGetInfo
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(860)
  Transaction 9 of length 99
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(667)
  switch message SMBtrans (pid 1846)
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
  trans <\PIPE\LANMAN> data=0 params=19 setup=0
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(335)
  named pipe command on <LANMAN> name
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/lanman.c:api_reply(3328)
  Got API command 13 of form <WrLh> <B16BBDz> 
(tdscnt=0,tpscnt=19,mdrcnt=66,mprc[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] 
smbd/lanman.c:api_reply(3332)
  Doing RNetServerGetInfo
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(860)
  Transaction 10 of length 84
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(667)
  switch message SMBtrans (pid 1846)
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
  trans <\PIPE\LSARPC> data=0 params=0 setup=2
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(335)
  named pipe command on <LSARPC> name
[2001/10/17 18:46:40, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(293)
  api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 0