samba - May 1999 - ) Re: Too Many Active Users - With MS Access 97 (PR#17307)

This is great news since I too have this problem.

One question please. Could this be causing a problem where a win98 machine
cannot write new files to the samba share (but can read and edit a file just
fine)? Other win95 machines can write just fine to this share.

Rehat 6.0 w/ stock samba (sorry don't know it and don't have access
right
now)

thanks
charles
>Someone else has confirmed the problem. It's actually a
>bug in the glibc2.1 supplied with RedHat 6.0. This glibc
>is pretending to have 64 bit file locks and really doesn't,
>thus causing Samba to not use it's own 64 -> 32 bit lock
>mangling which was designed to fix this precise issue.
>
>Arggghhhh. I wish the glibc people had *checked* that
>just dropping the top 32 bits of a lock request was the
>correct thing to do (HINT: it isn't :-).
>
>Ok. I will be releasing a later RPM for RedHat 6.0 to
>fix this issue. The Samba code is currently correct, I
>just need to change the autoconf tests to detect this
>bug in glibc.
>
>If you are able to build Samba yourself, the solution is
>to unpack the Samba source code, and then hand edit the
>configure script to change the one line that reads :
>
>samba_cv_HAVE_STRUCT_FLOCK64=yes
>
>to say :
>
>samba_cv_HAVE_STRUCT_FLOCK64=no
>
>And then rebuild Samba in the normal way (either
>via rpm or via ./configure; make).
>
>Note, this is a Linux glibc2.1 specific issue only,
>Samba is functioning correctly on other platforms.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
> Jeremy Allison,
> Samba Team.
>
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------
>Buying an operating system without source is like buying
>a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.
>--------------------------------------------------------