Hi all, I have a possible issue with the way UMC creates samba shares and I'd like to check that I'm not crazy or that there's no bug in either UMC or samba testparm output.
On our 4.1-2 e176 system consisting of 1 DC-Master, 1DC-Backup and a member samba server, what I've done is:
- created a list of shares under UMC > domain > shares assigned to the member server
- UMC looks like it creates the folders for the shares on the member server, and generates specific configuration files for samba under /etc/samba/shares.conf.d/
- UMC looks like it creates includes for the /etc/samba/shares.conf.d/ files in /etc/samba/shares.conf
If I run samba testparm on the UCS samba server, I receive the usual output, however each share definition appears to have an "include" statement assigned to it for the following share. So for example [Share A] has an "include" directive referencing "/etc/samba/shares.conf.d/shareb" for the [Share b] definition following it.
Here's a screenshot of the resulting output:
I stress that I have not used any local overrides or done anything to mess with samba outside of creating the definitions in LDAP with standard UMC features. The testparm output is representative of the default configuration generated by UMC on this system.
What I'd like to know is:
- Anyone else getting similar results?
- Is this just a cosmetic bug with testparm not doing the merging of the various UMC created config files properly - and so there is no real effect on the actual configuration?
For example: the files under /etc/samba/shares.conf.d/ all include the relevant [sharename] in their configuration, so you would assume they would get correctly merged in the final active samba config?
- Or, is there a bug in the way that UMC is generating the samba config files from it's UCR templates so that the includes are put in the wrong share definitions?
My main concern is that some share specific configuration for [share B] ends up affecting [share A] as the include will pull the /etc/samba/shares.conf.d/shareb file into the wrong place (see screenshot).
Just want to find out if this is nothing to worry about (because testparm is wrong) or it could have weird side-effects (because UMC shows correct settings while the final merged samba config is including config into the wrong shares).
Hope that's clear, thanks for any help.