No subject

Mon Dec 1 11:34:25 GMT 2003

is turned on. Can anybody
kind to confirm with me?

Our network is using a mix of Win2k server, Win2k Pro, Win98, Win95 and
WinMe machines, where the
Win2k server is the domain controller and terminal service applications
server and the Samba is a member
fileserver of the domain. All workstations logon and mount the samba file
services.

We'd like to check if the problem could be solved by setting the oplock =
false or any other tweaking is needed.

Thank you very much!
Vincent

From: "Norm Dressler" <ndressler at dinmar.com>
To: "Matt Stevenson" <matt_stevenson at alum.shu.edu>,
  <samba at lists.samba.org>
Subject: RE: LDAP status
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:49:22 -0400
Message-ID: <NEBBKIMKGKLKGAOABJPKEEHBCMAA.ndressler at dinmar.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <01053109181400.06245 at uc.shu.edu>
Sender: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
Errors-To: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
Precedence: bulk

This is a great resource for LDAP and Samba:

http://www.unav.es/cti/ldap-smb/ldap-smb-HEAD-howto.html

But it uses an older version of Samba -

Norm

-----Original Message-----
From: samba-admin at lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-admin at lists.samba.org]On
Behalf Of Matt Stevenson
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:18 AM
To: samba at lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: LDAP status

I have been searching google/deja for discussion about LDAP and Samba in
general for weeks now, but can't find any good answers, just lots of people
asking the same questions.

We are planning a major (10,000+ accounts) roll out of Samba to replace a
Netware system, and LDAP would be a MAJOR help in doing this, I'm surprised
it's not more of an issue for people.

Matt

On Thursday 31 May 2001 09:11, you wrote:
> I asked essentially the same question and didn't get much of an answer.  I
> wonder why it has been ignored and dropped since it's original beta...
>
> Norm
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-admin at lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-admin at lists.samba.org]On
> Behalf Of Michael L Torrie
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 6:12 PM
> To: samba at lists.samba.org
> Subject: LDAP status
>
> What is the status on getting LDAP support for samba passwords and
> information in 2.2.x (CVS)?  This feature is an essential feature that we
> need in order to deploy Samba as a replacement for our Novell system.  Is
> there a todo list on what needs to be done to get LDAP running?  I can
> provide a limited amount of assistance in coding/debuggin.  How about a
> proposed official schema (besides the ones from AD)?
>
> thanks,
>
> Michael
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba

Return-Path: <lwatta at sj-core.cisco.com>
Delivered-To: samba at samba.org
Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com
  [171.70.157.152]) by lists.samba.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0EFE449A
  for <samba at samba.org>; Thu, 31 May 2001 06:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com
  [171.69.11.130]) by sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP
  id f4VDnZc24188; Thu, 31 May 2001 06:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mcfeely.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
  sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f4VDp5D05150; Thu,
  31 May 2001 06:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cisco.com (lwatta-sun.cisco.com [64.102.35.42]) by
  mcfeely.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id
  JAA04371; Thu, 31 May 2001 09:51:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3B164C63.3240BBC2 at cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:51:31 -0400
From: "Louis C. Watta" <lwatta at cisco.com>
Organization: Cisco Systems, RTP
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4m)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at pcug.org.au>
Cc: samba at samba.org
Subject: Re: Why does samba stat the /dev tree?
References: <3B151FD1.D960E753 at cisco.com>
  <3B162D95.C26E879E at bartlett.house> <3B163F79.3B96A8B at cisco.com>
  <3B164254.800A9ACC at bartlett.house>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
Errors-To: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
X-BeenThere: samba at lists.samba.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:samba at lists.samba.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba>, <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: General questions regarding Samba <samba.lists.samba.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba>, <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/

Yeah!! That's it.

I actually just installed the Solaris SkIP module instead of getting egd
to work. It was much easier to install and test. But samba is acting
correctly now.

Thanks, I owe you one!!!

louis

Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> 
> Tha would require me knowing somthing about egd :-)  Best place to look
> might be the OpenSSH archives, as that NEEDS a good random source, and I
> think there should be the info you need in there somewhere.
> 
> The way samba uses /dev/urandom is quite simple.  It attempts to read
> it, and if it reads a full 40 bytes, it consideres its job done.  If it
> does not, or the operation fails, it will attempt to stat every device,
> mix that info in with some private data (like the /etc/smbpasswd file,
> and the root password) and hope its random.
> 
> So as long as samba gets somthing from /dev/urandom, it will work (I
> think, I just use linux, where this isn't an issue).  Other options
> include making samba stat the files in /tmp instead, but ask sombody
> else about that...
> 
> Andrew
> 
> "Louis C. Watta" wrote:
> >
> > So how do I tell samba to use egd?
> > I don't see anything in the configure options.
> >
> > With egd installed it's doing the same thing still.
> >
> > louis
> >
> > Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > >
> > > "Louis C. Watta" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm running samba 2.2.0 on a Solaris 2.6 box.
> > > > The system has 25,000 entries in /dev. Everytime a client connects the
> > > > smbd process stats every device in /dev. I ran truss on the smbd
> > > > processes and see it running stat64 on all the devices.
> > > >
> > > > This takes a long time and usually the client times out and fails. Every
> > > > once and a while a client will be able to connect. I've tried "dont
> > > > descend = /dev" and that does not seem to work.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone know what smbd does this? and how I can stop it?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Its almost certinaly its lame attempts at random number generation on a
> > > box without /dev/urandom
> > >
> > > I would suggest installing one of the programs that provides such a
> > > device (if kernel support unavailable).  The name egd comes to mind.
> > >
> > > Andrew Bartlett
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Bartlett
> > > abartlet at pcug.org.au
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> > > instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
> >
> > --
> > Louis Watta                            lwatta at cisco.com
> > Cisco Systems
> > 7025 Kit Creek Road
> > Research Triangle Park, NC 27709       Ph: 919-392-3710
> 
> --
> Andrew Bartlett
> abartlet at pcug.org.au

-- 
Louis Watta                            lwatta at cisco.com
Cisco Systems
7025 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709       Ph: 919-392-3710

Return-Path: <don_mccall at hp.com>
Delivered-To: samba at lists.samba.org
Received: from atlrel1.hp.com (atlrel1.hp.com [156.153.255.210]) by
  lists.samba.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEDC15168 for
  <samba at lists.samba.org>; Thu, 31 May 2001 06:52:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xatlrelay1.atl.hp.com (xatlrelay1.atl.hp.com
  [15.45.89.190]) by atlrel1.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E2215D2;
  Thu, 31 May 2001 09:52:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from xpabh4.corp.hp.com (xpabh4.corp.hp.com [15.58.136.1]) by
  xatlrelay1.atl.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A131F523; Thu, 31 May
  2001 09:52:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by xpabh4.corp.hp.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
  id <L9W9BSW0>; Thu, 31 May 2001 06:52:36 -0700
Message-ID: <079FD72E42C9D311B854009027650E6F04050A96 at xatl02.atl.hp.com>
From: "MCCALL,DON (HP-USA,ex1)" <don_mccall at hp.com>
To: "'Vincent W.S. Tam'" <vincent at aib.net>, samba at lists.samba.org
Subject: RE: file already open by someone error?
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 06:52:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
Errors-To: samba-admin at lists.samba.org
X-BeenThere: samba at lists.samba.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:samba at lists.samba.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba>, <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: General questions regarding Samba <samba.lists.samba.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba>, <mailto:samba-request at lists.samba.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/

Hi Vincent,
Probably the easiest way to see if oplocks is your problem is just try it;
On one of the shares that you see this problem, add the smb.conf parameter
oplocks = no
OR if you know the extension of the files that you are having this issue
with, use the smb.conf parameter
veto oplocks = /*.<extension>/

And then have multiple people try to access these files and see if the 
problem goes away.

Hope this helps,
Don

-----Original Message-----
From: Vincent W.S. Tam [mailto:vincent at aib.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:35 AM
To: samba at lists.samba.org
Subject: file already open by someone error?

Dear all,

Our network users constantly reported 'access denied' and 'file is already
open by someone' problem.