Quoting the log:
> Unpacking replacement samba ...
> Illegal instruction
> dpkg: warning - old post-removal script returned error exit status 132
> dpkg - trying script from the new package instead ...
> Illegal instruction
> dpkg: error processing
> /var/cache/apt/archives/samba_2%3a3.2.3-1ubunt
marking as fixed for jaunty.
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Released
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu Intrepid)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
Status: New => Incomplete
--
Samba 3.2.3 has a memory leak that vanishes by upgrading to 3.2.5
https://bugs.launc
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 234786 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/234786
marking as a duplicate of bug #234786. This bug is resolved in Ubuntu
8.10 and beyond.
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 234
Thank you for reporting this bug and helping to improve Ubuntu.
This bug is not present in the version of samba in the upcoming Ubuntu
9.04 release, therefore I'm marking this report as fixed.
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
smbcontrol reports Segmentation fa
This additional variable is unnecessary, the check should simply modify
the default for the 'GENERATE_SMBPASSWD' variable if anything.
Also, I don't agree that it's correct to assume "users in LDAP" implies
"samba in LDAP". Even if it does, the samba package won't read from
LDAP out of the box, i
A useful bit of information here: ISC dhcpd uses raw sockets to grab
incoming packets before they pass through the IP stack and IP tables, it
therefore doesn't suffer from problems caused by broken firewall rules.
Dnsmasq uses standard IP sockets so that all incoming packets are
filtered by iptable
The script /etc/network/if-up.d/mountnfs is meant to mount both nfs and
cifs mounts present in /etc/fstab when the network interface comes up.
This works just fine for me in the case of NFS mounts; I haven't tested
with cifs, but I don't see anything in that script that should fail.
(Unless NM is s
Is this a recurring problem, or did it just happen the one time? If the
problem is not reproducible, then we'll have to close this report since
there's not enough information here to reproduce the problem.
--
samba restart broken in intrepid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/298680
You received th
Fine for me, then.
--
[FFe] Upgrade to likewise-open 5 for Jaunty
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/323601
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to likewise-open in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists
Yes, it now works for me too.
--
SASL/GSSAPI problem in OpenLDAP
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/328436
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to openldap in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubunt
Approved as long as someone from server team is assigned to watch over
bugs and deal with any issues that come up.
** Changed in: likewise-open (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
[FFe] Upgrade to likewise-open 5 for Jaunty
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/323601
You received this bug not
The description in this bug report is complete; it is a request to
enable the WINS NSS module by default.
However, I'm going to have to mark this bug 'wontfix', because the
nss_wins module isn't mature enough to enable it by default, and using
it can cause recursion problems for apps in a variety
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Masood wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Binary package hint: postfix
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the third time that I have posted this error and also, provided
> more information by posting the out put of apt-get install postfix but I
> have not received any feedback ye
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 02:39:53AM -, Paul Dufresne wrote:
> I now tend to think this is caused by the -1 not being casted to appropriate
> type in:
> setresgid(-1,gid,-1);
> and in:
> assert_uid(-1, uid);
> in lib/sec_util.c as I said in bug #314657 causing problems on 64 bits
> machines.
Ab
I'll do it.
I'm in close contact with upstream so that all bugs get handled quickly.
** Changed in: likewise-open (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
--
[FFe] Upgrade to likewise-open 5 for Jaunty
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/32
Just to be clear.
Are you suggesting that to have my Ubuntu laptop to connect to my
Windows desktop on my 3 PC LAN, I've to setup an internal DNS server?
Or do I miss something?
--
cannot resolve windows host name
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/270395
You received this bug notification because
In my (limited) experience, the server only responds with the AD bit set
which it can validate the DNSSEC records on the domain. As there is no
root key in the DNS now, this means you must configure trust anchors on
your recursive nameserver.
My question would be: is your recursive DNS server act
This is confirmed with
Ubuntu Jaunty alpha5 AMD64
samba 2:3.3.0-3ubuntu2
and no, I do not have any DNS server on my LAN.
I cannot try the above fix because Synaptic fails when installing
winbind (404 file not found), but still I'm not able to do:
ping
Notice that if I open Nautilis to smb://
This is because using 'ping ' attempts to look up a host using
DNS. Using 'smb:///' uses lmhosts. If you were to go to Windows
and type 'ping ' it would fail the same way.
--
cannot resolve windows host name
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/270395
You received this bug notification because you a
Yeah, I began to realise I was wrong before reading you comment.
I have a new, I hope better hypothesis now.
It look a bit stupid, but maybe it is trying to become a deleted user.
For ZDS (original poster) it would have means he would have deleted the
"nobody" user (normally nobody have
id 65534
For Berni, I meant:
"sudo cat /etc/group | grep 1001" of course.
--
Samba crashes repeatedly to assert_uid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/216358
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to samba in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs mail
Thank you for this bug report.
Many other similar bugs have been reported, some on Ubuntu, sometimes on
Fedora, or even in FreeBSD.
In Ubuntu I speak of bug #216358, bug #314657 and bug #229654.
Could you check if user ID 11789 really exist by doing:
sudo cat /etc/passwd | grep 11789
sudo cat /e
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 03:01:40AM -, Paul Dufresne wrote:
> It look a bit stupid, but maybe it is trying to become a deleted user.
> For ZDS (original poster) it would have means he would have deleted the
> "nobody" user (normally nobody have id 65534 in /etc/passwd, but I
> remember a time w
23 matches
Mail list logo
