Problems with ACL's?
ricky.nance at weaubleau.k12.mo.us
Tue Feb 19 17:14:46 MST 2013
Charles, I was talking with Andrew Bartlett a little bit ago about the
possibility of adding a --sysvoldir option, and apparently there already is
one. --option="state directory = /alternate/path/tosysvol". And yes a clean
slate when doing provision is always good. I typically do a mv
/usr/local/samba/etc /usr/local/samba/etc.bak && mv
/usr/local/samba/private /usr/local/samba/private.bak (I change .bak to
domainnames if I have a couple of things I am testing). Anyway, glad you
figured it out.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Charles Tryon <charles.tryon at gmail.com>wrote:
> I'm going to assume that this is related to some of the differences between
> 4.0.0 and the current 4.0.3, and possibly some miss-steps I may have taken
> in the process. There are definitely some issues with the provision step
> NOT being an entirely "clean slate" and trying to preserve some current
> settings if it finds them.
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Charles Tryon <charles.tryon at gmail.com
> > Update:
> > Still investigating, but it SEEMS like I have solved this by removing my
> > ENTIRE old /usr/local/samba directory and starting over from scratch.....
> > Will write more when I've done some more tests...
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Charles Tryon <charles.tryon at gmail.com
> >> I've been away from this list for a while so it's altogether possible
> >> that I've missed something in the discussions here, but running into a
> >> problem with ACL support that I haven't been able to sort out.
> >> I'm building on two different bases: One is a FC16 based server which
> >> running very well as a Samba4 server right up through the 4.0.0 release.
> >> The other is a CentOS 6.3 server installed as a "minimal server"
> >> configuration, which means it's missing a LOT of the extra packages that
> >> you'd usually see on a vanilla system. I was thinking that the problem
> >> some missing development library, but I have since found that BOTH
> >> are exhibiting the same error.
> >> I have gone through the HOWTO again to make sure I haven't missed any
> >> setup steps. In particular, I've run through the OS requirements page
> >> required RPM packages, and the xattr test steps. I'm made sure that my
> >> /etc/fstab lines for the various ext4 physical file systems have the
> >> "user_xattr,acl,barrier=1" attributes. The setgattr and getfattr tests
> >> return exactly the results that are shown in the Wiki page.
> >> touch test.txt
> >> setfattr -n user.test -v test test.txt
> >> setfattr -n security.test -v test2 test.txt
> >> getfattr -d test.txt
> >> getfattr -n security.test -d test.txt
> >> touch test3.txt
> >> setfacl -m g:adm:rwx test3.txt
> >> getfacl test3.txt
> >> HOWEVER, on both the system which was running fine before, and on the
> >> system, I get the exactly the same response when I try to run the
> >> provisioning step:
> >> ldb: module schema_load initialization failed : No such object
> >> ldb: module rootdse initialization failed : No such object
> >> ldb: module samba_dsdb initialization failed : No such object
> >> ldb: Unable to load modules for /usr/local/samba/private/sam.ldb: (null)
> >> samdb_connect failed
> >> VFS connect failed!
> >> ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): Provision failed -
> >> ProvisioningError: Your filesystem or build does not support posix ACLs,
> >> which s3fs requires. Try the mounting the filesystem with the 'acl'
> >> File
> >> "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/domain.py",
> >> line 398, in run
> >> use_rfc2307=use_rfc2307, skip_sysvolacl=False)
> >> File
> >> line 2052, in provision
> >> raise ProvisioningError("Your filesystem or build does not support
> >> posix ACLs, which s3fs requires. Try the mounting the filesystem with
> >> 'acl' option.")
> >> ? uname -a
> >> Linux samba.bbaggins.net 3.6.11-4.fc16.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 8 20:57:42
> >> UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> >> Any ideas where I should be looking?
> >> --
> >> Charles Tryon
> >> “Risks are not to be evaluated in terms of the probability of success,
> >> but in terms of the value of the goal.”
> >> - Ralph D. Winter
> > --
> > Charles Tryon
> > _________________________________________________________________________
> > “Risks are not to be evaluated in terms of the probability of success,
> > but in terms of the value of the goal.”
> > - Ralph D. Winter
> Charles Tryon
> “Risks are not to be evaluated in terms of the probability of success,
> but in terms of the value of the goal.”
> - Ralph D. Winter
More information about the samba-technical