"net vampire" does not work on any scenario (win2003, win2008, samba4)

[Zahari Zahariev]

  Hi Matthias,

The problem has been fixed.

Thanks!

On 10/4/10 6:29 PM, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
> Hi Zahari,
>
> I've found the reason. The "dsdb/common/util.c" functions are invoked 
> also against Windows on vampire operations. Therefore they need to 
> support both deleted objects detection mechanisms: the DELETE control 
> and the RECYCLED control. The DELETE control can be sent as critical 
> since each AD version supports it and the RECYCLED one I send 
> uncritical so that older implementations don't blame.
>
> I will push a fix through autobuild soon. If you can't wait then 
> please check out my autobuild branch and apply it manually to your 
> source tree.
>
> I hope this is enough - if it still doesn't work please inform me.
>
> Greets,
> Matthias
>
> Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Hi Zahari,
>>
>> the problem is that it sets the new RECYCLED control which is only 
>> intepreted on Windows >= 2008R2 as critical. I will see where I have 
>> to fix this.
>>
>> Sorry for the breakage, but the implementation of the RECYCLED 
>> control isn't that easy.
>>
>> Greets,
>> Matthias
>>
>> Zahari Zahariev wrote:
>>> Hello Matthias & list,
>>>
>>> Yesterday just before 8pm EET these patches were submitted:
>>> === Start 03-10-2010 20:01:02 ===
>>>
>>> @ Clean up old binaries
>>> COMMAND: make distclean 2>&1
>>> WAF_MAKE=1 ../buildtools/bin/waf distclean
>>> 'distclean' finished successfully (56.567s)
>>> Status: OK
>>>
>>> @ Pull new source changes
>>> COMMAND: git pull 2>&1
>>> > From git://git.samba.org/samba <http://git.samba.org/samba>
>>>     4b16cc9..79a4be4  master     ->  origin/master
>>> Updating 4b16cc9..79a4be4
>>> Fast forward
>>>   source3/smbd/blocking.c                            |   18 ++-
>>>   source3/smbd/close.c                               |    9 +-
>>>   source3/smbd/conn.c                                |    8 +-
>>>   source3/smbd/globals.c                             |   13 +
>>>   source3/smbd/globals.h                             |    2 +
>>>   source3/smbd/open.c                                |   17 +-
>>>   source3/smbd/oplock.c                              |   35 +++-
>>>   source3/smbd/smb2_lock.c                           |   10 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/common/util.c                         |   16 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/common/util.h                         |    1 +
>>>   source4/dsdb/kcc/kcc_deleted.c                     |    2 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/acl.c               |    2 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/acl_util.c          |    4 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_store.c |    2 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/linked_attributes.c |    4 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/objectclass.c       |   21 ++-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/objectclass_attrs.c |    2 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/operational.c       |    4 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c    |   51 +++--
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/show_deleted.c      |   73 +++++-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/subtree_delete.c    |    3 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/subtree_rename.c    |   15 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/util.c              |    4 +-
>>>   source4/dsdb/tests/python/deletetest.py            |  237 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++--
>>>   source4/dsdb/tests/python/ldap.py                  |   92 --------
>>>   source4/kdc/db-glue.c                              |   16 --
>>>   source4/lib/registry/patchfile_dotreg.c            |    2 +-
>>>   source4/rpc_server/drsuapi/drsutil.c               |    2 +-
>>>   source4/scripting/bin/upgradeprovision             |    9 +-
>>>   source4/scripting/python/samba/__init__.py         |    4 +-
>>>   30 files changed, 472 insertions(+), 206 deletions(-)
>>> Status: OK
>>>    After which all of my testing vampire/replication scenarios 
>>> stopped working. They started to produce the following error during 
>>> "net vampire" command (debug level 10):
>>> http://pastebin.com/B2gQNs8j
>>> Can someone tell me is there a major change in how you call "net 
>>> vampire" committed along with the above changes?
>>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>