[Samba] Any pitfalls updating straight from 3.0.34 to 3.5.2?

[Gaiseric Vandal]

I had a problem with group mapping with samba 3.0.x to 3.4.x with an 
ldap backend.  Samba looked through the entire section "samba" part of 
the ldap structure for group mapping, not just the  defined group  
section.     The group mapping for Domain Administrators got messed 
up.    I also had some privilege issues but it may have been tied to this.


On 04/20/2010 05:22 PM, Julien Savoie wrote:
> I actually had an issue.  I'm using an ldapsam and rpc rights assigned
> through the command "net rpc rights" disappeared for the few users and
> groups that had the ability to join a machine to the domain.  I had to
> re-grant the "SeMachineAccountPrivilege" privilege.  Going from samba
> 3.0.x to 3.5.x, for whatever reason this database of privileges didn't
> upgrade.
>
> ray klassen wrote:
>    
>> Well that's a bit of a relief. I've no active directory in our system. I was trying to wait for samba 4 to go production. Only thing is I've a win 2008 server that I want to bring into our domain and as it's similar to windows 7, it would seem that an update to 3.atleast4 is indicated.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: "Hoover, Tony"<hoover at sal.ksu.edu>
>> To: ray klassen<julius_ahenobarbus at yahoo.co.uk>; samba at lists.samba.org
>> Sent: Fri, 16 April, 2010 11:30:07
>> Subject: RE: [Samba] Any pitfalls updating straight from 3.0.34 to 3.5.2?
>>
>> If you're not connecting to an Active Directory (either as a trusted domain,
>> or as a domain member), configuring Kerberos may not be required.
>> If you do require Kerberos,  the [realms] and [domain_realm] sections would
>> need to be customized for your network.  Additionally, the default_realm
>> entry in the [libdefaults] section would need to be edited.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tony Hoover, Network Administrator
>> KSU - Salina, College of Technology and Aviation
>> (785) 826-2660
>>
>> "Don't Blend in..."
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ray klassen [mailto:julius_ahenobarbus at yahoo.co.uk]
>> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 1:04 PM
>> To: Hoover, Tony
>> Subject: Re: [Samba] Any pitfalls updating straight from 3.0.34 to 3.5.2?
>>
>> Wow. Thanks.
>>
>> Is there any quick way do create a krb5.conf file. (i.e. standard defaults
>> and so on?)
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: "Hoover, Tony"<hoover at sal.ksu.edu>
>> To: ray klassen<julius_ahenobarbus at yahoo.co.uk>; samba at lists.samba.org
>> Sent: Fri, 16 April, 2010 10:00:28
>> Subject: RE: [Samba] Any pitfalls updating straight from 3.0.34 to 3.5.2?
>>
>> Some entries in your smb.conf have changed default values.  Get a listing
>> from "testparm -v" before and after to be able to work around those details.
>>
>>
>> Also, IIRC, With the newer samba 3 packages (starting around 3.3), you need
>> to have a correctly configured krb5.conf file.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tony Hoover, Network Administrator
>> KSU - Salina, College of Technology and Aviation
>> (785) 826-2660
>>
>> "Don't Blend in..."
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: samba-bounces at lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org]
>> On Behalf Of ray klassen
>> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 10:46 AM
>> To: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Subject: [Samba] Any pitfalls updating straight from 3.0.34 to 3.5.2?
>>
>> Okay, so I've just put the sernet repo file in my yum.repos.d directory and
>> a yum update will elevate my samba server to the latest version. Is there
>> any pitfall that is out there that I can avoid before yum updating.
>>
>> Centos 5.3
>> samba3-3.0.34-37&  related packages
>> openldap-2.3.43-3.el5&  related packages
>>
>> I still have my samba3-3.0.34 packages squirreled away so I can force
>> downgrade if I need to, but I don't want to if I don't have to.
>>
>> Any advice before the plunge?
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>