Samba 4 and winbind
repenny at f2s.com
Thu Apr 18 12:01:43 MDT 2013
On 15/04/13 21:52, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 07:35:03PM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
>> OK, listen to bug 9795, but in my opinion ( for what it is worth )
> Thanks !
>> winbind is rubbish, god knows how many backends and setting options,
>> have you looked at sssd lately?
> Yes, quite recently actually. What you have to remember is
> that winbindd has been developed for a long time, and we've
> been learning along the way - the developers of sssd were
> some of the people who also added the backends and setting
> options to winbindd, as they were also learning how this
> thing should be done.
> sssd is an excellent solution, and the developers of sssd
> had the benefits of being able to learn from how winbindd
> was developed and any mistakes that were made along the way
> (many of which you still see as legacy support for the many
> backends and setting options :-).
>> Also they say that the truth hurts.
> No, directionless moaning without purpose hurts :-). The
> truth is always welcome :-).
Hi, I have just updated bug 9795 with what I believe is the problem, S4
winbind requires posix objectclasses but if you add the unix attributes
via windows ADUC, you do not get them, so by my reading, winbind
shouldn't require them.
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the samba-technical