On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 13:35 -0700, Dan Thurman wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 11:30 -0700, Craig White wrote: > > isn't /var/spool/samba where they put tdb files? I think that is the > > intent though on RHEL 3, RHEL 4, FC-3, FC-4 they seem to put them > > in /var/cache/samba which seemed to be a Red Hat packaging issue and the > > topic of some consternation on the samba mail list. I would hope that > > Red Hat packaging would have adjusted to /var/spool/samba with the > > release of FC-5 by putting the tdb files there instead > > of /var/cache/samba. > > I have no idea what /var/*/samba is for, expecially when the path > variable was updated to use it. It blew me away (littlerally :-) > I used Samba since it's ineption but fell out of it's use for > a long time due to windoes but now I am back into the game. A > lot has changed and I am catching up again. ---- I noticed it years ago - when they released samba 3.0.0 though it appeared to be the same samba, the configuration options seemed the same, it really is a different beast and that's because Windows too has changed. That it is now capable of being a PDC/BDC, interacting in real time with LDAP and stuff, it is a completely different program. I actually thought I understood samba-2.2.x but I had to learn a lot to go to samba -3.0.x ---- > > I am now fiddling with SELinux control over samba, yet another > (but necessary security) administrative layer on top. Things > sure get more complicated with every passing year! sigh. ---- and seeing your question on fedora-selinux, I would think at this point, I would probably suggest that you shut off selinux as it pertains to samba if you really want samba to use /var/www if there isn't a way to have multiple contexts (and I am not certain that there is). Craig
