AW: Windows Profiles not being placed in defined logon path

[Rudolf Kollien]

After upgrading to samba 2.0.6 i get this problem to. But only the
"USER.DAT" file is stored in the root of the user directory. All other files
are correctly under \\machine\user\profile. Seems this is a bug.

Regards

Rudolf Kollien
email: Rudolf.Kollien at medas.de
       Rudolf.Kollien at kollien.de
*********************************************************
Never trust a operating system you have no sources for
*********************************************************
Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.
*********************************************************

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: samba at samba.org [mailto:samba at samba.org]Im Auftrag von Federico
> Sevilla III
> Gesendet am: Dienstag, 16. November 1999 23:21
> An: Multiple recipients of list SAMBA
> Betreff: Windows Profiles not being placed in defined logon path
>
>
> Hi there everyone,
>
> I recently upgraded to 2.0.6 from 2.0.5a in a hope to improve data
> integrity (I was having oplock_break problems that would affect the
> integrity of a lot of Excel files). So far so good with the oplock_breaks
> (even with oplocks reenabled). :-)
>
> However, I've started having problems with the clients' Windows profiles
> not being placed in my defined logon path. They're supposed to be in
> \\linux-server\<user's home>\profile and things used to be that way, with
> that linking to /home/user/profile. However recently, things started being
> saved in /home/user ONLY even for those who already had profiles before!!!
>
> This isn't really bad, except for me since I'm not a pure Windows user.
> The doggone thing shares a desktop with my KDE, and I don't particularly
> like it that way. Not to mention cluttering /home/user with USER.DAT. Ugh.
> Hehehe ... ;>
>
> Okay, back on track. I did a testparm and so far so good. The config dump
> showed me more-or-less what I was expecting. Here's a snippet of my
> smb.conf which may be relevant (taken from testparm to include the
> left-as-defaults). BTW, my clients are all Microsoft Windows95 OSR2 boxes,
> except a Linux box which I use. They are set to logon to the domain 'tlc'
> which is also their workgroup and is defined in smb.conf as the
> workgroup.
>         logon script = startup.bat
>         logon path = \\%N\%U\profile
>         logon drive =
>         logon home = \\%N\%U
>         domain logons = Yes
>         os level = 255
>         lm announce = Auto
>         lm interval = 60
>         preferred master = Yes
>         local master = Yes
>         domain master = Yes
>
> It seems alright, if you ask me, and I didn't change much (except removing
> my oplocks=no) when I upgraded to 2.0.6. It looks like that's when things
> started m*essing up but I am NOT sure. Perhaps it could be the Windows
> boxes? I have this thing for believing that when you're dealing with a
> Windows box and things suddenly don't work, sometimes that's exactly what,
> it just didn't work, nobody's fault, it decided to mess up. But I'm hoping
> you people could help me out and enlighten me a bit more.
>
> If the information I provided is lacking, please let me know. Also a
> personal favor, please cc me at this address? I'm not subscribed to the
> list. I will be checking the list regularly to watch this thread, though!
>
> Muchos gracias! :)
>
>    [        Jijo Sevilla         ]
>    [ jijo at leather-collection.com ]
>
>