[Samba] [PATCH] Re: Samba 4.1.17 classic update w/LDAP - parsing error

[Mgr. Peter Tuharsky]

Hi all,

thank You for Your answers and the help.

1, I have never applied a patch to Samba in Debian. Please, is there any
howto or documentation?
2, If the patch worked for the import, would it be possible to revert to
a distributional (unpatched) Samba afterwards?
3, We don't use any of the mentioned symbols in group names, just . and -
4, Unfortunately, we have a . in the NT4 (netbios) domain name. We
already have issues with that, but only in Windows 8. Could this be the
reason of the import error? I doubt that though because other import
steps finished flawlessly, including netbios name registration during
import process.
5, (Might be OT, depending on previous answer): If needed in order to
resolve the problem, is it possible to simply and without consequences
change the domain (netbios) name in LDAP, providing that SID would
remain untouched and change in smb.conf would reflect the new name? Or
the Windows clients use both the netbios name and SID in order to access
their domain and they would drop off domain?

Peter

Dňa 24.09.2015 o 09:57 Andrew Bartlett napísal(a):
> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 09:12 +0200, Michael Wood wrote:
>> Hi
>> On 23 Sep 2015 9:47 PM, "Andrew Bartlett" <abartlet at samba.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 06:59 +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>>> That looks like a bug.  My guess is that, as Roland suggested,
>> the
>>>> group name isn't just normal characters.  We do support other
>> chars
>>>> in
>>>> group names, but the bug here was not to escape the values.  You
>>>> could
>>>> expect a particular problem with any of these in particular: =,()
>>> Can you confirm this patch (against master, but should apply back
>> to
>>> 4.1) works for you?
>>>
>>> If so, can I get a second team member to review/push?
>> Does that still result in them being in CN=Users? Or is that not
>> important?
> Indeed, that is what I get for writing patches at 7 in the morning :-)
>
> Try the attached.  We really, really need some good expected-value
> testing of the upgrade system.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew Bartlett
>