Re: Local Admin question
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, David Given wrote:
What kind of problems does "id" cause for you? I can't remember any, and
am just curious. You may also replace some of the core utils with the
Debian versions, see:
http://debian-interix.net/debian-interix/bootstrap-tools/coreutils/bin.tgz
coreutils' 'id' doesn't support -D, for example. OTOH Interix' 'install'
*doesn't* support -D (although a different -D...), which some Debian
packages need.
Ok, now I see your point. You shouldn't replace all Interix utils by
the ones in bin.tgz. Only those that cause trouble. Included are all
that I could build, but they may not all be useful for Interix in some
cases. That's one reason why I didn't package them. I'm just not sure
which ones should be replaced and which ones should better stay at the
interix versions.
So I have renamed /usr/bin/install to /usr/bin/install-itx and
extracted /usr/bin/install from bin.tgz. For id it's vice-versa:
/usr/bin/id and /usr/bin/id-gnu.
Really bad would be if one of the tools would have problems in the
interix version and other problems in the Debian version. This hasn't
shown up yet, fortunately.
And indeed, "id <uid>" isn't supported by coreutils' id, even on
linux, only "id <name>" works.
[...]
This shouldn't confuse Debian. I saw and fixed some (very few) packages
with that issue, but these packages are rare. If you encounter such a
package, please report.
Will do. It just struck me as dodgy.
[...]
To cite Rodney: When you do an "id -D" what do you get for an output?
If you take the uid from the above command and do "id <uid>" what happens?
id -D (using Interix' ID):
uid=1049757(FNORD+dg)
gid=1049089(S-1-5-21-701420117-754076188-841501257-513)
groups=1049089(S-1-5-21-701420117-754076188-841501257-513),
These 2 lines above may also be part of the problem: SIDs which can't
be resolved to names.
65792(+Everyone), 197614(DG-PC+PasswordPropDeny),
131616(BUILTIN+Administrators), 131617(BUILTIN+Users
), 66820(NT AUTHORITY+INTERACTIVE), 66827(NT
AUTHORITY+AuthenticatedUsers), 4095(CurrentSession), 66048(+LOCAL), 1049680
FNORD is the name of my domain. DG-PC is the name of my machine.
id 1049757 produces this if I use Interix' version:
uid=1049757(dg) gid=1049089(S-1-5-21-701420117-754076188-841501257-513)
groups=1049089(S-1-5-21-701420117-754076188-841501257-513),
65792(+Everyone), 197614(DG-PC+PasswordPropDeny),
131616(+Administrators), 131617(+Users), 66820(+INTERACTIVE),
66827(+Authenticated Users), 4095(CurrentSession), 66048(+LOCAL), 1049680
If I use coreutils' version of 'id', I just get:
id: 1049757: No such user
see above.
This is when logged in as myself. When logged in as Administrator,
networking works fine.
Did you try/can you try with another local (i.e. non-domain) user,
besides Administrator? I really have no idea, but could imagine that a
timeout could occur because your DC with the user database is on a
slow link. (I suppose you have enabled the setuid functionality of
SFU, (see install doc.)
And BTW: what exact command do you try to execute? Which hosts (or
merely OSes) are involved?
No other information, and AD is something I know very little about. I am
on a machine on a remote domain, if that makes any difference.
What do you mean by "remote domain"?
Sorry, I don't know any of the correct terminology... all my account
information is held on a server operated by someone else that's about
6000 miles away. This means that I don't have very much control over
what it says about me (and is also the reason why I can't log in as
Administrator). Also, it makes operations that need to look up account
info very slow; the id command above take ~10 seconds to run, and 'ls
- -l' can take an age.
Thanks, I understand now.
[...]
One other oddity I've noticed: apt-get source fails after the downloads
with 'Failed to create child process'. OTOH dpkg-source -x works fine.
Those kind of errors may be fixed by the core hotfixes (those which
update posix.exe, psxdll.dll, psxss.exe, psxrun.exe).
I've managed to install the emboldened hotfixes, those, but am still
kinda confused about the order in which I should install them --- given
that a lot of the hotfixes replace the same files, which one gives me
the most recent version of the core files? Right now I've got version
8.0.1969.38.
You should probably install in increasing KB-ID order, especially if
files with no explicit version number are to be updated. To check the
latest file version see section "Current file versions on SfU 3.5
32bit" on the debian-interix hotfix page.
Martin
Reply to: