4.2rc2 and winbindd

Rowland Penny repenny241155 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 20 07:36:15 MDT 2014

On 20/10/14 14:23, Michael Adam wrote:
> On 2014-10-20 at 13:46 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
>> On 20/10/14 13:34, Michael Adam wrote:
>>> Hi Rowland,
>>> On 2014-10-20 at 13:07 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
>>>> On 20/10/14 12:44, Michael Adam wrote:
>>>>> Ok. I think the DC-with-winbindd scenario is special here,
>>>>> just need to understand, how so.
>>>> I thought that the whole idea of changing 'winbind' to 'winbindd'
>>>> was to get all the benefits of the established winbind without
>>>> having to do anything special, you are now saying that 'Something
>>>> special' may be required, if this is the case, just what is required
>>>> ????
>>> There are several points for using winbindd.
>>> Here are the two (imho) most important ones:
>>> - Make use of winbindd's ability to speak to other domains
>>>    (the winbind internal samba component can't), hence enabling
>>>    support for trusts!
>>> - Don't maintain two winbind implementations but just one.
>>> That being said, winbindd is avery versatile, flexible tool
>>> that can be configured in various ways. So similar to the
>>> mode of samba starting smbd for file serving, which also
>>> enforces several parameters for the running smbd (which reflects
>>> the special purpose for which smbd is run, namely to serve
>>> SMB in a DC setup), I could imagine that samba enforces
>>> several parameters to reflect the special situation.
>>> That's what I meant with special.
>>> I have not found anything special though with a brief look at
>>> the code.
>>> But that being said, of course things should work in the DC
>>> setup, and you have most certainly found a problem.
>>> Since I did not have the time yet to dig deeper, I don't know
>>> the answer yet. So we'll need to do more testing / digging until
>>> we find it or possibly Andrew can shed some light.
>>> We should have some nss-level test also in our selftest.
>>> (If this is not the case, then it needs to be added...)
>>> The samba-setup for this test (from the selftest provisioning
>>> code) would tell us how to proceed.
>>> (Just trying to give a few hints as to where I would look next
>>> if I had the time right now..)
>>> Cheers - Michael
>> Hi Michael, I have the feeling that you would like me to compile
>> samba again,
> No, not at all!
> I don't think your build is the problem.
> I was just trying to explain why I think that winbindd may
> be started with slighly different parameters from the samba
> daemon than when it is launched directly.
I think that could be a problem, I do not start the winbindd daemon 
directly, all I am starting is the samba daemon, this starts winbindd 
just like it starts the smbd daemon.


> We need to get the config parameters straight, and then,
> when we have identified the problem and possibly created
> a patch for the code, then you will need to recompile. ;-)
> Cheers - Michael

More information about the samba-technical mailing list