Bug 6549 - VFS recycle & force user
VFS recycle & force user
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: Samba 3.4
Classification: Unclassified
Component: VFS Modules
3.4.0
Other Windows XP
: P3 normal
: ---
Assigned To: Samba Bugzilla Account
Samba QA Contact
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-07-13 06:55 UTC by Lukas DESEYVE
Modified: 2009-07-13 12:31 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments
the log of my PC via connecting to share with parameter "force user" (171.85 KB, application/force-download)
2009-07-13 06:58 UTC, Lukas DESEYVE
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Lukas DESEYVE 2009-07-13 06:55:56 UTC
i have problem with share with parameetr "force user" and VFS module "recycle"
> > 
> > Here i my settings of VFS modul recycle
> > 
> > vfs object = recycle
> >                 recycle:repository = .recycle/%u
> >                 recycle:maxsize = 50000000
> >                 recycle:exclude = *.tmp *.temp *.o *.obj ~$*
> >                 recycle:exclude_dir = sdileni/*/profile* tmp temp cache
> >                 recycle:versions = yes
> >                 recycle:touch = yes
> >                 recycle:keeptree = yes
> > 
> > and this is my share
> > 
> > [my_share]
> >         path = /home/sdileni/instalace
> >         comment = software, instalace
> >         force group = smbgroup
> >         force user = smbuser
> >         public = yes
> > 
> > 
> > If i delete some file from this share, then samba make
> > directory .recycle/smbuser. But in older version (for example Samba 3.3.0)
> > samba maked directory .recycle/real_user - and this i need! It's possible?
> > I must have something new in configuration or is this new behavior of
> > samba?


I tried it with samba 3.4.0 and 3.3.6 and in both version is the same problem
Comment 1 Lukas DESEYVE 2009-07-13 06:58:48 UTC
Created attachment 4414 [details]
the log of my PC via connecting to share with parameter "force user"
Comment 2 Jeremy Allison 2009-07-13 12:31:21 UTC
I'm sorry, but the current behavior is the correct one. You have been depending on a bug that we fixed in the later code, sorry.
Jeremy.