Slashdot Log In
Samba 2.2.0 Released
from the look-what-we-got-kiddies dept.
Samba 2.2.0 - Powering the next generation of Network Attached Storage.
17 April 2001.
The Samba Team is proud to announce a new major release of Samba, version 2.2.0. This release includes significant feature enhancements for Samba, and sets the standard for UNIX® and Microsoft Windows® integration.
Enhancements include :
oIntegration of server terminated leases (Windows "oplocks") with UNIX NFS sharing (Linux 2.4 kernel and IRIX only). Complete data and locking integrity when sharing files between UNIX and Windows.
oAbility to act as an authentication source for Windows 2000® and Windows NT® clients, allowing savings on the purchase of Microsoft® Client Access Licenses.
oFull support for the automatic downloading of Windows 2000 and Windows NT printer drivers, providing the first full implementation of the Windows NT point-and-print functionality independent of Microsoft code.
oUnification of Windows 2000 and Windows NT Access control lists (ACLs) with UNIX Access control lists. Allow Windows clients to directly manipulate UNIX Access control entries as though they were Windows ACLs.
oSingle sign-on integration using the winbind server (available separately). Allow UNIX servers to use Windows 2000 and Windows NT Domain controllers as a user and group account server. Manage all user and group accounts from a single source.
oMicrosoft Distributed File System® (DFS) support. Samba 2.2.0 can act as a DFS server in a Microsoft network.
oShare level security setting. Allow security on Samba shares to be set by Microsoft client tools.
oMany other feature enhancements and bug fixes.
About Samba
Samba is an Open Source/Free Software implementation of the Microsoft CIFS/SMB protocols for UNIX systems. In development for ten years, Samba is considered to be the reference implementation of the CIFS/SMB protocol for UNIX systems. Samba test tools are used by all the CIFS/SMB vendors to test and fix their protocol implementations.
Samba is currently used in Network attached storage (NAS) and other products from the following vendors (Note: this does not imply endorsement by these vendors, please contact the vendor marketing departments separately for comments).
IBM®, SGI® (Samba for IRIX), Sun Microsystems ®(Cobalt Qube), Hewlett Packard® (CIFS/9000), VERITAS®, VA Linux Systems®, REALM Information Technologies ®, Network Concierge®, Procom ® and many others.
In addition, Samba is shipped as a standard part of Linux® offerings from Linux vendors such as Red Hat®, Caldera®, SuSE®, Mandrake®, TurboLinux ® and others.
Samba is being used worldwide to solve the problem of integrating hetrogeneous networks by corporations such as Agilent Technologies ®, CISCO Systems ®, and many others in addition to educational establishments and individuals
Best of all Samba is an Open Source/Free software project, available under the GNU GPL license meaning that source code for Samba is freely available for anyone to modify and customize.
Code from the Samba Team and individuals around the world has been integrated and tested to create Samba. In addition the following corporations have made significant donations of code, effort, testing facilities and support to make this release possible :
Linuxcare (now TurboLinux), VA Linux Systems, Caldera, SGI, Hewlett Packard, VERITAS, IBM.
This new release may be downloaded from our Web site at :
For press enquiries about this release please contact either Jeremy Allison (jra@samba.org), Andrew Tridgell (tridge@samba.org) or John Terpstra (jht@samba.org).
Samba - the SOURCE for Windows Networking !
Wha? (Score:2)
Umm...no shit. Isn't that the purpose of Samba?
Flamebait (Score:3)
His comments would have been more tempered if he said "environment they are used to" instead of "more stable, [yada]".
But that wouldn't be saying anything different.
/me ducks
Seriously though, having moved from a Linux environment to a Windows recently, I can attest that Windows is more stable these days than it was. But check this out, I just had to visit a company yesterday that I installed a samba server in over a year and a half ago.
I had never had to visit them since the time I installed it, until now that they are having hardware problems with the case its housed in. They aren't Linux gurus so I can attest that they haven't touched it.
I wonder if anyone can say they have a NT box in a production commercial environment that they haven't had to touch in 18 months, nay not even a reboot.
On my linux box at home, if my wife does something strange, like run tuxracer even though we don't have 3d acceloration, I can log in from work and fix it for her, while she is logged in and without stepping on what she is doing.
I know there is remote admin tools for NT and 2000, but honestly, they aren't as powerful and/or they interupt what the user is doing.
So, I hope this is more insiteful and evenhanded, but I don't need any more karma.
~^~~^~^^~~^
Solaris - nice clean build! (Score:2)
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
All I know is when my former boss decided that NT was the way to go, one day we had just one NT machine and next week there were about 8 of them.
Something was replicating!!!
Re:Cost (Score:2)
On top of that, administering a Windows network takes time, skill, and education, just as much as a UNIX network. MS talks about lower TCO if you just buy Windows, but that hasn't been borne out at my job.
We will know this is hurting MS when (Score:2)
They did the same thing when puting fast track or web site pro web server on NT Workstation was cheaper than getting NT Server + IIS for 'free'. They changed NT Worstation licence to say you couldn't have more than 10 tcp/ip clients at a time.
doh, that's what's driving WinXP.
-Peace
Dave
More Praise (Score:2)
Since we're all in a group hug now :-)
We (at work) have been using Samba for over a year now to serve a small workgroup of NT users. None of us (least of all me, the default sysadmin) are experienced NT or Windows users.
We recently switched our main server from an old (10 years?) SGI Indigo2 XL to a new Dell server - Samba 2.0.6 to 2.0.7. The process of compiling, installing and configuring Samba was straightforward and I can safely say that Samba is one of the most impressive and useful pieces of software I have ever used. Well done and many thanks to all responsible!
I should also put in a good word for O'Reilly for allowing the free distribution of the 'Using Samba' book - invaluable.
Maintaining mixed unix/NT can be a real chore (and I won't even mention Clearcase), but Samba has made it work beautifully. It's a pity that we also ended up with a Syntax TAS (Totalnet Advanced Server) system - purely for Clearcase ... it 'works' (well, actually it does), 'guaranteed support', 'recommended' ... :-/
At some point in the future, when I have time, I'd like to shift Clearcase, and it's SMB appendage TAS, to a Linux/Samba server - just to show it can be done. Then I could get rid of the Ultra5! Which would make me very happy :-)
Now if only there was an easy/cheap way to manage unix and NT users/groups from a unix machine, minus any NT server ofcourse.
Cheers!
--
Alastair
London UK
Re: pam_smb (Score:2)
Winbind sounds like it's the solution to that problem...
--
Re:Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (Score:2)
This long document [microsoft.com] on MSDN (scroll about 1/3 the way down to "Enabling WINS lookup") discusses setting up Microsoft's DNS server to use WINS to resolve names to any client that can point to a DNS server, including those which can't run Samba (OS/400, etc.) I've used it at work for a year with few problems.
Of course, you have to run Windows as your DNS server, which you may have technical or perhaps theological objections to. However, you can always have MS DNS forward on to your BIND server if it doesn't find the record in WINS, thus allowing you the best of both worlds (that's what we do.)
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
Are you getting the picture ?
You're comparing Samba, which is just the Windows file/print/authentication service for Windows clients on UNIX, with an entire Win2k/NT load.
You should be comparing a full UNIX/Linux distro. containing Samba to do a fair comparison.
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (Score:2)
Standard Linux sybase tools should talk to SQL server no problem (at least they used to). I depended on this in a previous life
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Aussies (Score:2)
Have they knocked down the cooling towers yet ?
:-).
Jeremy.
Re:Aussies (Score:2)
Jeremy.
Re:Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (Score:2)
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
BTW: I just uploaded the Red Hat rpms for 2.2.0 for Red Hat 6.2 and 7.0 intel onto samba.org.
Re:Aussies (Score:2)
Jeremy.
Re:Aussies (Score:3)
You're thinking of *Andrew*. He's a bloody Aussie !
Bloody foreigners, not knowing the difference between Australia and the UK, I dunno... mumble, grumble....
:-).
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Why this is tremendous... (Score:3)
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Compilers breaking because they're BROKE (Score:3)
-Wall -Wshadow -Wstrict-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-qual
to get *really* medieval on the code... (with apologies to "Pulp Fiction"
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Point and click printing (Score:4)
Of course that's been fixed by that "portable" OS, Windows 2000
As Samba runs on other things than x86 boxes this is braindamage for us...
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:5)
For many small sites this is all they need - not the full PDC stuff.
That's why I didn't say PDC, but used the phrase "authentication source".
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Point and click printing (Score:5)
I didn't mention it 'cos we already had that functionality - so it wasn't news
We've now got a *complete* (modulo bugs and one braindamage implementation issue, hang out on samba-technical@samba.org for details) implementation of W2k/NT point and print. That *includes* W9x driver download.
Cheers,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
Re:Cost (Score:2)
ditto.
YES, it takes more time (generally) to set up something under *nix than it does similar Windows services. However, would you rather put your budget into hiring a $90k admin who knows what s/he's doing, or into hiring a $50k admin who may or may not + $40k for licenses?
Re:Still too hard (Score:2)
"authentication source"? (Score:2)
Can someone explain this? Does this version of Samba in essence emulate Microsoft's licensing agent, allowing free use of features that Microsoft wants you to pay for, or does this mean something else?
Sounds like something that could result in a tidal wave of lawsuits from Redmond.
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:3)
order for NT server.
Re:a question for Jeremy Allison (or anybody) (Score:2)
Non root users can mount SMB shares all day long. The old smbmnt isn't needed...the new smbmount is called by the mount command
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
For example, if you plan on having a network of 20 Windows 2000 Professional workstations connected to a single Windows 2000 Server, in addition to the 20 licenses for Windows 2000 Professional and 1 copy of Windows 2000 Server, you would need to purchase an additional 15 CALs.
By providing you with free server software, Samba eliminates the need to purchase CALs, as they are server-specific. In the above example, the customer would only need the 20 Windows 2000 Professional licenses.
WiPEOUT
ACLs on Linux need patch. (Score:3)
greetings, eMBee.
--
Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (Score:2)
This might be a stupid (inexperienced question), but am I the only one who thinks it would be very useful to have Linux's hostname resolving scheme support Netbios name resolution? e.g. to be able to specify for example in /etc/host.conf something like "order hosts, netbios, bind" or something like that. So that typing (for example) "ping foo" would allow for a Netbios-named PC on the LAN called "foo"'s IP to be found, if it isn't in /etc/hosts, for example. We have a WinNT DHCP server on the LAN, and a Linux server that does some other stuff, and entirely Windows clients, so the Windows clients all get "random" IP addresses on startup. It's a pain to keep /etc/hosts up to date under this scheme, and its also a pain to use IP reservations for every client.
Apart from this probably esoteric setup, I'm sure there are many other possible useful applications for this to be supported (e.g. to recreate something like Windows Network Neighbourhood - how does the new KDE do this?). Seems to me "Linux as a workstation" could benefit seriously from this. You don't really want to be going around explaining the "smbclient" command parameters to every employee - in Windows this stuff "just works, point and click", at least from a user perspective.
Is something like this planned? Is it something that would perhaps be easier to support with the planned LibSMB?
Is this already possible and I just don't know how (or haven't tried recently)? Admittedly its been at least 6 months to a year since I last looked at this stuff. Sorry if it's a stupid question.
-----
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
However you've simply replaced dealing with server based licences with complexities of client based licencing.
The approach of just buying one for each client is fine so long as your network were never to change after that. It's all too possible for someone to forget the CAL with a new machine. Also are they technically transferable? IIRC you need different CAL's for NT4 and 2000 too.
Let alone that both methods are pure money making schemes of software companies. With a per server setup there is at least the possibility that different numbers of licences could actually alter the way things work.
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
Because it dosn't need to. Samba is written primarily for unix, which takes a modular aproach, unlike the Windows "plate of sphagetti" design.
For most of the list you have a quite a choice which program to use, with some things such as MTA, you have a huge choice.
Re:Cost (Score:2)
You still need a skilled person to install Windows. Especially given the kind of documentation MS puts out.
Windows supports unattended installations which can be initiated with little or no effort, provided the configuration settings are correctly specified.
However it can take a lot of effort to get these configurations right in the first place. As well as messy mistakes to clean up if they are wrong.
Also how do you get any version of NT to automatically create user shares. Do you know that NT automatically shares it's whole filesystem, by default too. In most cases you don't want this.
Re:On Linux and Win 2K RIS (Score:2)
The "including applications" can also be interpeted as "Windows can't cope with having it's apps on a network drive very well"
So when a user messes up their PC,
So even with Windows 2000 the end user can still mess with things only the admin should really be able to touch?
If something the user did means you have to reinstall the whole OS then something is seriously broken somewhere.
Re:Still too hard (Score:2)
This might work on the simplist of setups. But it dosn't scale to many servers using NIS. Which is an area where the samba docs are unclear.
Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (Score:2)
Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (Score:2)
Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (Score:2)
Re:DBD::ODBC (Score:2)
Re:A wager.... (Score:2)
why would it be hard for them? Breaking implementation would help MS because it would prevent people from buying non MS products. MS has a history of backstabbing companies that it partnered with. Did they all find god all of a sudden or something?
Re:Still too hard (Score:2)
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
I know this will happen `when its done', but what's the currentstatus of BDC / PDC functionality (inc. replication). What's a credible date to think that Samba should be capable of this? Are we talking within six months, a year, or more?
Mike
new section (Score:3)
Re:Point and click printing (Score:2)
Point and click printing (Score:4)
This is a huge acomplishment. Using samba's print services has always been a bit of a PITA in large networks. You get a print spooler that doesn't hang when you look at it funny but you had to install drivers for each printer on the workstations. Micrsoft's server products will automagicly provide a driver for clients when you connect to the shared printer, now samba does it too.
Hats of to Jeremy and the Samba team, this is a great feature.
Would have been kind of nice to see 9x clients supported too though.
Great Colors (OT) (Score:2)
Other Samba News (Score:3)
Fact:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/010417/0071.html [yahoo.com]
Opinion:
Slashdot mentioned VA Linux in this article. This makes it more difficult to complain about the lack of "full disclosure". On the other hand, important material information is still missing.
It seems that in an effort to appear unbiased, the editors are reluctant to post anything about VA Linux at all, even when it is perfectly legitimate to do so. VA Linux hiring top level Samba developers is major news. Don't be ashamed, be proud!
In their effort to avoid being perceived as a PR arm of VA Linux, they are being somewhat evasive and this is backfiring.
Let's not forget our friends (Score:4)
And BSD
And AIX
And Solaris
And Irix
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:4)
Sounds like something that could result in a tidal wave of lawsuits from Redmond.
Funny you should mention this situation. Are you familiar with Gateway Services for Netware included with Windows 2000 Server? What this allows you to do is set up a Novell server using IPX/SPX, connect a Win2k server to it with that service running, and an entire Win2k TCP/IP network of Windows clients can use the Novell server and only have to buy a single Netware license, since it's only using a single connection (the Win2k Server). Think of it as NAT for a Novell Server.
A tidal wave of lawsuits? I don't see any from Novell against Microsoft, why should Microsoft care if Samba beat them at thier own (dirty) game?
"Why didn't I join Microsoft? [LAUGHTER]"
Samba absolutely rules (Score:3)
Re:Cost (Score:3)
Besides, installation of components in Linux is simpler than Windows (no rebooting), and the know-how needed to properly configure it will take an hour, maybe two to glean from the HOWTOs.
"You have to consider the cost of employing someone with the required skills"
Besides, the box of a Win 2k implementation might as well say "MCSE Not Included" right on it. At least with Linux you won't have to spend $1000's for the software on top of IT salaries
"Windows supports unattended installations"
"provided the configuration settings are correctly specified."
Like I said, "MCSE Not Included."