Samba 2.2.0 Released 174
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 !
Cost (Score:1)
Re:new section (Score:1)
Gosh, isn't it a UNIX app? (Score:1)
unquesitonably among the most important server apps on Linux.
And here all this time I thought it was an important UNIX application. Oh, look. So do the authors of SAMBA.
I'm sure your corporate masters at the Open Source Developers Network love your attention to the ideals of pimping GNU/Linux.
Wha? (Score:2)
Umm...no shit. Isn't that the purpose of Samba?
Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (Score:1)
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:1)
Re:unattended setup of windows clients. (Score:1)
Gee, that sounds alot like my experience installing Debian GNU/Linux on a 9 year-old Sun Sparcstation LX. I just had to setup bootp and tftp, download the tftp image and a couple others from the debian site. It started up, got its ip address, sucked down the boot image and booted it. Then it kept me up till after 5am in the morning while it downloaded packages through the masqueraded internet connection. It took me a couple of times to get the TFTP image to load (wrong name), but everything else went very smoothly.
Oh how I now wish that PCs had something like the OpenBoot Prompt. The BIOS's in current PCs are downright primitive. Very little has changed in the last 15-odd years. It's pathetic.
I wonder how long until M$ trumpets this as their next great "innovation"...
Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (Score:1)
~^~~^~^^~~^
Re:Flamebait (Score:1)
phutureboy:"But that [karma] took 81 years to earn!"
onlawn:"That's okay, I don't need it much any more"
(disclaimer, I have it wrong so anyone who can give a better trascript feel free to do so...)
~^~~^~^^~~^
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
Re:Aussies (Score:1)
While I agree with the sentiment, I should point out that Judas Priest are from Birmingham. You could have had Bruce Dickinson, though.
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:Cost (Score:1)
Flip side of the coin is that the $90K guy is probably going to be able to do a hell of a lot more than just basic administration. Whether or not this is worth it to a given company will mostly depend on whether they see IT as a strategic asset or as a cost center.
Re:Cost (Score:1)
My general experience with M$ versus Unix is that it takes four times as long to solve something in Unix, but once it's solved it's done and you never have to touch it again. With M$, you generally pay a lot more up front in licensing (compared to the free Unices), and you also pay a lot more in ongoing maintenance as stuff mysteriously breaks. If you need the services up instantly, use Windows. If you have some time to twiddle and a talented person to do the twiddling, Unix may be a better bet.
For the dotcoms, that were all about flash and sizzle, Windows made a lot of sense. For the companies who are in it for the long haul, I tend to think that Unix is a better solution a lot of the time. Probably the single most important factor is the overall skill level of the IT staff, with the caveat that if you don't push them a little they're not improving as fast as they might be. (note I said a LITTLE.
As an aside, W2K does seems substantially better than NT, but still not as good as Unix.
So what's left to do? (Score:1)
(You know, the Samba guys have done a wonderful job simply because I have to ask this question. Everything remaining is probably just niggling details.)
--
Re: pam_smb (Score:2)
Winbind sounds like it's the solution to that problem...
--
Re:Aussies (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
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:1)
And yeah, most $90k admins are generally able to do more than just admin - they typically have programming skills as well. (However, you don't want to hand over an integral part of your programming effort to an admin who may be called away at a moment's notice to deal with a haxx0r attack.)
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?
praise Him (Score:1)
Thanks.
Re:Still too hard (Score:2)
Re:Aussies (Score:1)
Much prefered "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" myself. Not made in Sheffield but still bloody funny.
Anyway, keep up the good work.
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:1)
I've also used 2.0.7 to move a novell netware server at work over to linux, handling domain logons from 5 or so client machines, and serving cds, etc. these are only win98 machines, though.
The only problem I've had with it though, is occasionally the client machines will say the password has been rejected. If I look in the samba log, it has 'connection reset by peer' mesages. I've searched on google, and have found other people with the same problem, but no solution. Has this been fixed in 2.2?
Cheers =)
"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:Still too hard (Score:1)
I'm curious about that. You aren't supposed to use share-level permissions anymore? They still work fine (and are easier for the newbie).
--
Re:Still too hard (Score:1)
Real typical MCSE fodder, BTW (was one in a past life): Do This, Never Mind Why, Never mind when you shouldn't do this.
--
Re:A wager.... (Score:1)
Note that Microsoft itself has got several implementations of the protocol -- everything from Windows For Workgroups to DOS to OS/2 to earlier versions of NT to Win 95/98 to "LanMan For Unix" are all slightly different. And they have promised to support these patforms.
They probably can't break Samba without accidentally pissing on their own customers (enterprise customers that is, they'll piss on you home users all they want but if tye). That is, unless they spent a large amount of time trying to find the exact breakage that applys to Samba and not any other SMB product.
The only thing that they probably really dislike is the PDC-emulation. Expect that to break (OS/2's PDC functionality on a NT network broke a long time ago). Solution: Keep your PDC on NT unless you are prepared to face the consequenses. Real Solution: Use something like NFS instead of a proprietary protocol.
--
ACL and XFS acl plus trusted linux (Score:1)
XFS i hope will be in the kernel soon
(please linus )
intresting though is SGI released their trusted IRIX stuff and want a trusted linux
hope this does not clash with NSA stuff
(finaly the NSA doing their job of protecting people(US))
but how long are we going to have to wait until I can ditch my solaris boxen and say to the boss yes this is secure and supported AND from a company with nice PR people to keep him happy ?
regards
john jones
Re:Cost (Score:1)
> Although Samba may be free, the skill and effort required to install and configure it is not.
Bah.
cd
curl http://us1.samba.org/samba/ftp/samba-latest.tar.g
tar -xvzf
cd samba-2.2.0/source
./configure
make install
/usr/local/samba/bin/swat &
and voila! nice preety gui for dem winders foks
As for the ease of configuring Windows, sure, it's real easy to set up. Badly. Tell me, are these inexpensive employees who can't install Samba going to be able to tell you if you're exposing the IPC$ share to the world? If you're allowing case-insensitive LANMAN passwords? Sounds like the guys running Microsoft's routers.
Not even going to comment on the 'supports unattended installations...provided the configuration settings are correctly specified.'
Re:Still too hard (Score:1)
Remember, only a fool makes a comment such as yours. A true master offers guidance and encouragement to an obvious newbie, in the hope that a new master shall one day emerge.
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:1)
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
Re:Still too hard (Score:1)
Re:Aussies (Score:1)
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.
-----
DBD::ODBC (Score:1)
Should do the trick.
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:Still too hard (Score:1)
If you are dumb keep it to yourself maybe we won't notice.
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:More Praise (and more...) (Score:1)
We had it running on NT for about a year and a half. It served a consistent 70-73 records/sec. The server needed to reboot at least 3-4 times per week. The Goldmine clients recieved "blob" errors (dbf) at least once, usually twice, a day.
Since the software is just served up to the Windows clients and run there, I decided to move it to a Samba server. I installed 2.0.7, made it the PDC, and also enabled wins resolution. Hey, cool, three birds with one stone...
That server has been up for 38 days, 16 hours with *no* problems *at all*. Add to that, I get at least 170 records/sec, up to 400/sec at times. That translates to everyone being happy.
Thanks to the Samba team!
Yea!!! (Score:1)
DFS is a really nice feature to have, since a sysadmin can create a single SMB share that links to all of the other network shares... less to remember and less support calls like, ``where's such-and-such folder again?''.
Also being able to edit the ACL directly from a Windows NT/2000 workstation is nice... probably won't have to do a lot of chown/chmod-ing again
Re:Cost (Score:1)
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:Flamebait (Score:1)
Can I have your karma?
--
Re:Why this is tremendous... (Score:1)
And would this not offer unfettered access to your internal network if one of the boxes was compromised through its public interface?
Might be better to have a staging server behind the firewall, and use rsync or something to update the public webservers.
Something to think about.
--
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)
MS-'kerberos' support (Score:2)
--
Re:new section (Score:2)
Also, people that strongly believe that
--
Re:Cost (Score:2)
Why this is tremendous... (Score:2)
I have the SAMBA servers as part of the domain, but it is a hacky solution. I map everyone's NT Domain name to a UNIX name, and they can access the appropriate files.
NT Domain integration was always a little strange. With SAMBA 2.2, the issues should be much cleaner. ACcording to the release, I don't need to create Unix AND NT users, I can just grant access to my NT Domains. This was theoretically possible before with pam_smb (or smb_pam) but was always a confusing mess.
Also, even if I need to create accounts for the users that log in, not having to create accounts for the users that ONLY access via SMB will be a blessing. Not having a bunch of accounts with shell false just to support SAMBA will make life easier.
Adding an NT File Server is a joke, I plug it in, join the domain, create local groups (if I want) and share files with the permissions. Easy as pie.
Doing the same on SAMBA was a pain because I needed to give each user a UNIX account. This meant that a server for 5-10 people was fine, but trying to give an arbitrary group access to the machine was a nightmare.
This will be a tremendous release, and I look forward to putting it on test servers soon and deploying it in production in the next few months.
Alex
Re:Why this is tremendous... (Score:2)
Alex
Re:Aussies (Score:2)
Full Monty doesn't impress me. Def Leppard and Judas Priest, though: That impresses me.
--
Re:Aussies (Score:2)
My mistake. I was thinking of the Judas Priest album Sheffield Steel, but of course the album is actually British Steel [amazon.com] . Sheffield Steel [amazon.com] is a Joe Cocker album.
--
Re:Cost (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that the install of NT we were trying around here today was attended by demonic spirits. If the monitor started spewing forth pea-soup like liquids at me it wouldn't have surprised me at all.
Justin Buist
Differences between Slashdot and Freshmeat (Score:2)
Can't we just save everyone the trouble of bookmarking two sites and just glue /. and Freshmeat together
You don't call Slashdot "Slashf---ed" when it covers dot-com bad news [f---edcompany.com]. So why call it Slashmeat? Slashdot covers only newsworthy software releases. This includes packages critical to system and network structure (OS kernels, server software, major security patches, etc.) and "cool" stuff that fits the day's omelet. The new Developers section goes a long way toward this*. If you want, you can exclude this section in your user settings [slashdot.org] if you don't want to look at so-called "Slashmeat."
Either way, don't bother bookmarking two sites. A link to OSDN Freshmeat II [freshmeat.net] is in the OSDN box to the left of the textarea where I paste this very comment.
* It also may represent budget cuts in the OSDN division of VA Linux Systems Inc. [google.com] If scoop and Taco can work together nicely enough, the integration of Slashdot and Freshmeat may be a Good Thing for LNUX's bottom line [yahoo.com].
Compilers breaking because they're BROKE (Score:2)
And when Linux kernels rev and compilers break, this is....? Progress? Innovation?
The GCC developers are not as worried about backwards compatibility as they are about CORRECTNESS. If new features highlight optimization BUGS or standards NON-CONFORMANCES in a given compiler, the compiler is at fault. GCC has kept up very nicely. If you are worried about a new compiler breaking your old code, compile with gcc -Wall to show where your code relies on non-conforming misfeatures of old compilers.
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.
Re:"authentication source"? (Score:2)
Of course SAMBA uses and even simple licensing scheme: connect as many clients as you want without any paperwork whatsoever. That's got to be a lot easier to deal with, don't you think?
a question for Jeremy Allison (or anybody) (Score:2)
The bug that bothers me most is when a windows box goes down (can you imagine that?) only root can unmount the share.
My question is whether this aspect of samba has been fixed. I have combed through all the online material and cant seem to find an answer to that.
Re:A wager.... (Score:2)
Scheduled release for Windows XP is in the near future, but I don't belive it has went gold yet, I say M$FT breaks everything again, or in a friendly windowsupdate patch soon after release.
I'll take that bet. Microsoft has actually been quite cooperative with the Storage Network Industry Association(SNIA) in providing more detailed information on how the Common Internet FileSystem(CIFS) (yes, that's MS's offical name for their networking protocol) servers and clients are supposed to work. It would be very hard for them to change something and not have it affect a lot of implementations. Now authentication software is a different story. I'm not sure what the status of their Kerberos business is.
Let's not forget our friends (Score:4)
And BSD
And AIX
And Solaris
And Irix
Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (Score:2)
Unix vs. the Stupid (Score:2)
"We need to support all these windows users."
"okay, let me setup this file server... yeah... windows..."
Re:Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (Score:2)
There may be a way to do this via broadcast the same way Windows machines without WINS do, but I don't know it.
WINS Clients -- Unix and Unix-like Systems It's very easy to configure any computer running SAMBA as a WINS client, but recall from the server discussion that SAMBA can't be a WINS server and a WINS client at the same time. So, first ensure that the smb.conf file entry "wins support = yes" (which configures the SAMBA computer as a WINS server) is a comment (the default). Then edit the next line to read "wins server = www.xxx.yyy.zzz ," where www.xxx.yyy.zzz is the IP address of your WINS server.
You don't have to reboot the Unix computer. SAMBA automatically reads the configuration file changes. To force the changes to take place immediately, rather than waiting for SAMBA to read the changes from the configuration file, you can stop and restart the SAMBA programs using the /etc/rc.d/init.d/smb stop and /etc/rc.d/init.d/smb start commands.
You will have to configure a WINS server on one of the Windows servers for this to work, and add the WINS server entry to your DHCP configuration.
Let's face it .. (Score:2)
--
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."