Stupid goddamn samba problems.
Apr. 13th, 2016 10:59 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theweaselkingSo for reasons that truly escape me[1], network file shares for Windows users are shared via a CentOS machine running Samba instead of directly off the NetApp via CIFS.
Anyway. It's working, except there's a thing: By default (and currently), samba logs are separated by machine - they log to /var/log/samba/%m.log which means there's one log for each laptop or desktop.
It would be handier to have the logs separated by user, or by service. The docs all say to just change that %m to %u for User or %S for Service... but if I do that, I get files LITERALLY CALLED /var/log/samba/%u.log or %S.log. It doesn't expand the user or service and give me per-user or per-service logs the way the docs and mailing list RTFMers say it will, it throws them all in a single file with a literal percent sign in it.
Anyone run into this and remember the magic spell to fix it?
CentOS 5.11, Samba 3.0.33.
[1]: "Legacy, changing would require resources, changing would require users to do something different" oh wait I guess the reasons don't escape me but OH FUCK OFF.
Anyway. It's working, except there's a thing: By default (and currently), samba logs are separated by machine - they log to /var/log/samba/%m.log which means there's one log for each laptop or desktop.
It would be handier to have the logs separated by user, or by service. The docs all say to just change that %m to %u for User or %S for Service... but if I do that, I get files LITERALLY CALLED /var/log/samba/%u.log or %S.log. It doesn't expand the user or service and give me per-user or per-service logs the way the docs and mailing list RTFMers say it will, it throws them all in a single file with a literal percent sign in it.
Anyone run into this and remember the magic spell to fix it?
CentOS 5.11, Samba 3.0.33.
[1]: "Legacy, changing would require resources, changing would require users to do something different" oh wait I guess the reasons don't escape me but OH FUCK OFF.
(no subject)
Date: 2016-04-14 02:53 pm (UTC)Did you get it working? As in, "did you kludge the existing kludge in a manner that made it work, with some complaints and scathing comments written in conf file"?
(no subject)
Date: 2016-04-14 02:57 pm (UTC)I'll also test %s instead of %S.
(no subject)
Date: 2016-04-15 01:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2016-04-15 01:38 pm (UTC)