[Samba] Re: Looking for a set of definitive answers (long)

[Jeremy Allison]

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 06:51:39PM +0000, Avery Payne wrote:

> There's the rub.  The existing staff expect to use the in-place GUI 
> toolset and have no interest in learning command line tools (including 
> the department head).  Yeah, I know, nothing you can do about that 
> directly, but indirectly, it might be worth looking into making minor 
> tweaks to function with the Computer Management snap-in.

I've just fixed a couple of bugs with the Computer Management
plug in operating against Samba for 3.2 release.

> You can test this easily by openning several files (Excel, Word, Access, 
> doesn't matter) at several workstations, start making changes but *don't 
> save them*...let the workstations and server sit for a bit...then open 
> the Comp. Mgmt. snap-in, right-click on the top of tree, select "Connect 
> to another computer...", place the server name in the dialog that appears 
> and click on [OK].  Navigate to Computer Management -> System Tools -> 
> Shared Folders -> Open Files.  You'll see a list of files that are 
> "open".  Note that after a long period of time - say, a few days - that 
> the file you openned *doesn't appear in the list* after a refresh (press 
> F5 to refresh).  Nothing wrong with that, as I understand that the client 
> or server may close the connection - but if you do this same operation on 
> a "stock" Windows box, the file handle is persisent for as long as you 
> have the file open and both the server and workstation running.  In short 
> - the file semantics being reported are different between a Samba server 
> and a Windows server when using this tool.  If this is a design decision, 
> you might want to have a small blurb in the docs someplace about how 
> those semantics differ, so administrators don't feel like they're going 
> insane when they can't figure out why a file is still in use but it isn't 
> reported by the snap-in.

Now you've raised this to my attention I'm going to make sure
that the MMC computer management works 100% when operating against
a 3.2 server (it's easy to do for 3.2 as Guenther and Jerry
already did the work to convert to IDL and I just need to
fix bugs in their work :-).

Cheers and thanks for the heads up on the problem,

	Jeremy.