This is a discussion on Re: [Samba] changing passwords from Windows XP Pro workstations - Samba ; Gary Dale wrote: > Craig White wrote: > >> I'm keeping this on list. >> >> On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 08:52 -0500, Gary Dale wrote: >> >> >>> Craig White wrote: >>> >> >> >> >> >>>> ---- >>>> if ...
Gary Dale wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
>> I'm keeping this on list.
>> On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 08:52 -0500, Gary Dale wrote:
>>> Craig White wrote:
>>>> if I was going to guess...I think your problems are...
>>>> see items #3 through #7
>>>> you don't have a passwd chat script as I recall. That's probably
>>>> your setup should track this setup as I see it.
>>>> since you have no interest in advancing your skills, count me out next
>>>> time unless you learn to ask simple questions. The simple truth is, if
>>>> you want know little, point and click Windows network administration,
>>>> you are probably better off using a Microsoft Windows server.
>>>> My interest is in helping people that actually are interested in
>>>> learning something, yes gasp, those that actually do want to become
>>>> expert. Lastly, I would heavily suggest you forget about LDAP until
>>>> attitude changes because it is hostile to administrators that don't
>>>> to become knowledgdable.
>>> Thanks Craig. I think you'll see a problem here. You suggest that
>>> the issue may be a lack of a passwd chat script, while two others
>>> suggest I remove the passwd chat script - which is almost identical
>>> to the one in the second URL you just gave.
>>> The issue isn't about whether people want to learn. It's about how
>>> much they have to learn to get things to work. If something takes
>>> too much effort, in the real world it doesn't get done. There is
>>> nothing inherently complicated about managing a directory service.
>>> Look at the simple Linux tools for user or printer administration
>>> for proof. I see no virtue in making Samba-LDAP configuration a
>>> black art. A basic setup should be easy to achieve. In fact, from
>>> what I have been reading, LDAP should be the standard Samba backend.
>>> That won't happen if people have to spend a week or more learning
>>> how to use it.
>> You completely do not get it.
>> Samba is infinitely configurable.
>> Windows - at the moment of setup you have to choose the role for a
>> server, whether a domain controller or a member server. The workstation
>> is sold separately.
>> Samba provides all of those roles including a Windows 95/98 server too.
>> There is no way that anyone can solve your problem with any certainty
>> without suitable logs, an inspection of your tdbsam and your /etc/passwd
>> files AND the smb.conf, the whole of which you dumped on us last night
>> and undoubtedly have changed many times since. Proper mail list
>> etiquette and a commitment to demonstrating that you are actually
>> focused on the problem would dictate that you limit those items to only
>> the minimum necessary logs, smb.conf, etc.
>> Your information is incomplete and as I stated last night, I am not
>> going to speculate any further on your problems. In fact, your reply has
>> made me sorry that I even speculated on the solution to your problem.
>> As for my 'seeing' the problem - that being in your mind - different
>> suggestions to solve your problem - that is absolutely absurd.
>> ***The problem*** is you don't know how to provide the information with
>> which someone can tell you what the definitive solution would be.
>> As for your suggestion that Samba-LDAP a black art...Samba is Samba and
>> LDAP is LDAP - you understand neither package so expecting them to work
>> for you is a rather pointless endeavor. Knowledge is power and you
>> appear to be lacking both. Yet you expect them to work for you even
>> though you don't understand them nor wish to understand them - I wish
>> you luck.
>> Let me be blunt - you are a help vampire. Please don't email me any more
>> until you change your ways.
> Under your rules, it is up to the patient to figure out what tests
> need to be performed before visiting the doctor.
> I have always regarded the help process as a dialogue - maybe that
> comes from my having worked in systems support at one time, or maybe
> it comes from my being a systems consultant (both inhouse and contract
> at various times) - but I have never expected the customer to tell me
> what is wrong in a manner that I can immediately say "here's what you
> have to do".
> In my experience, the customer/patient comes to the experts with a
> problem. The experts dig around to determine what the issue really is,
> including asking for specific tests or more information. Then they
> make a diagnosis and prescribe a treatment/solution.
> Insulting the patient/customer is usually not a good way to go about
> things. I've been working with PCs since 1978 and with Linux since
> 1998. I put a lot of effort into learning about making things work.
> And according the the Mensa test, I'm not stupid. But I'm also not
> someone who has a narrowly defined role. My customers expect me to be
> broadly knowledgeable on just about every topic associated with
> computers. Even if I became an LDAP guru, I'd be unlikely to maintain
> that level of expertice for long. That is a fact of life in the real
> Responding to your particular criticism about what I did post: You
> have demonstrated on several occaisions that you haven't read or
> understood my posts. You have said that you weren't sure what setup I
> was using LDAP or tdbsam) when my post stated I was using tdbsam. You
> said I didn't have a passwd change dialogue, when the smb.conf I
> posted did. And you said that I posted the entire smb.conf when I
> clearly indicated that I had trimmed unnecessary parts from it.
> I note however that this exchange has generated some helpful tips on
> resolving the problem. This is in sharp contrast to my earlier posts
> on the topic last September, and my recent posts on problems with
> LDAP, both of which were largely ignored (except for an exchange with
> Jeremy Allison which didn't resolve the problem). My "style" of
> posting this time seems to have achieved results, so if you object to
> it, perhaps you should look at your "style" of figuring out who to
> respond to. If I'd had this level of response last year, or even in
> my LDAP posts, things would have been a lot simpler for me.
> BTW: Windows, the last time I looked (which was W2K), allows you to
> change server roles. You can add or remove domain control
> functionality easily. And I recall using a third-party tool to promote
> and demote NT domain controllers before W2K (actually, it was helpful
> in moving the organization from NT to W2K and in restructuring the
> domain setup).
> I'm not going to defend Windows, but I'm also not going to resort to
> hyperbole about Linux being "infinitely configurable". There are only
> a small number of reasonable backends for Samba. They are tdbsam, LDAP
> and MySQL. Clear, straightforward configuration of each is not
> unachievable. It's only one more backend than Windows domains have (NT
> and ADS).
> Anyway Craig, thanks for your input. You've been quite helpful.
Raúl D. Pittí Palma
Global Engineering and Technologies
Republic of Panama
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the