Jo tio, todavia estas por ahiiii???> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: by way of "Salvador P. S?nchez" <salva@umh.es>
> [mailto:samba@samba.org]
> Enviado el: mi?rcoles 17 de marzo de 1999 21:10
> Para: oscar.martinez@umh.es
> Asunto: SAMBA digest 2024
>
>
> SAMBA Digest 2024
>
> For information on unsubscribing see http://samba.org/listproc/
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Samba 2.0.3 on DEC Alpha 2100
> by "Lance A. Brown" <brown9@niehs.nih.gov>
> 2) RE: dos?
> by "Roylance, Stephen D." <SROYLANCE@PARTNERS.ORG>
> 3) smbprint and Solaris 2.6
> by Craig Weatherhead <cweather@fastenal.com>
> 4) Re: Master browwer issue
> by "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> 5) Re: Domain logon problems
> by "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> 6) Re: dos?
> by "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> 7) nmbd daemon dies
> by "Per-Erik Persson" <per-erik.persson@commentor.se>
> 8) RE: SAMBA digest 2023
> by "Nelson, John P." <NelsonJP@genrad.com>
> 9) Re: dos?
> by Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <jcastro@pcshop.com.br>
> 10) Samba Problems! Please help!
> by Iztok Polanic <iztok@hakl-hakl.si>
> 11) RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> by Anthony David <adavid@adavid.netinfo.net>
> 12) RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> by "Dave Walton" <walton@emusic.com>
> 13) Problems with timely writes from win98
> by Brian Bagnall <bbagnall@sonic.Aureal.com>
> 14) Re: SAMBA digest 1944
> by YongPeng_Yao@notes.seagate.com
> 15) Re: Domain logon problems
> by Miquel Bonastre <miquel@fib.upc.es>
> 16) Attaching Samba to NT domain
> by Alex Fichman <fichman@ipexsoft.co.il>
> 17) RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> by Rich_Jones@wmg.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:08:26 -0500
> From: "Lance A. Brown" <brown9@niehs.nih.gov>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Samba 2.0.3 on DEC Alpha 2100
> Message-ID: <3950.921596906@splat.niehs.nih.gov>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I am trying to upgrade Samba running on a Compaq Alpah 2100 w/ Compaq
> Tru64Unix V4.0D PK1 on it. Currently, 1.9.16p11 is running on it
> just fine.
> When I install the new 2.0.3 binaries and try to access the SMB
> service from
> another unix system using smbclient I get:
>
> brown9@splat:~ $ smbclient -L jeeves
> Added interface ip=157.98.XXX.YYY bcast=157.98.15.255 nmask=255.255.248.0
> Invalid packet length! (90997 bytes).
>
> I've seen mention of this kind of problem in the dejanews
> archives but was
> unable to find a definitive fix. One person reported that
> swapping out the
> ethernet card did the trick.
>
> I also have Samba 2.0.2 running on an Alpha 4100 with V4.0D PK3 with NO
> problems at all.
>
> Has anyone out there had success running 2.0.3 on an Alpha 2100?
>
> thanks,
> --[Lance]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:21:14 -0500
> From: "Roylance, Stephen D." <SROYLANCE@PARTNERS.ORG>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <samba@samba.org>
> Subject: RE: dos?
> Message-ID:
> <D59DAAEA98A2CF11B61200805FFE2AE6C1C52E@phsexch3.mgh.harvard.edu>
>
> Using the MS network client for dos you should be able to access a samba
> server.
> The MS client tended to use a lot of conventional memory and it can be
> difficult
> to get a program to run correctly while using it.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vball@socrates.berkeley.edu
> [SMTP:vball@socrates.berkeley.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, March 15, 1999 4:49 PM
> > To: Multiple recipients of list
> > Subject: dos?
> >
> > I have an old dos app that doesn't run in the win95 shell very
well.
> > There are problems with the graphics.
> > Is it possible to connect to a samba server from real dos? I assume
> > the
> > answer is no but I thought I would check.
> >
> > Verne Ball
> > vball@socrates.berkeley.edu
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:22:30 -0600
> From: Craig Weatherhead <cweather@fastenal.com>
> To: 'SAMBA LIST' <samba@samba.anu.edu.au>
> Subject: smbprint and Solaris 2.6
> Message-ID: <ED32805AF20ED21186AE00805FA61534EDDE99@nut.fastenal.com>
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a Solaris 2.6 machine, and I would like to be able to print to
> all of the HP Laser printers that are on my network. These printers are
> controlled by an NT print server.
> I know how to set up a printer within Linux to print to these printers
> but I'm kind of confused as to how to set this up on my Solaris 2.6
> machine. I don't want to have to load Jet Direct software on my Solaris
> machine, when I know that Samba is quite capable of doing what I need.
> The problem is that I'm somewhat new to Solaris 2.6 administration.
>
> Craig Weatherhead
> cweather@fastenal.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:09:23 -0800
> From: "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Re: Master browwer issue
> Message-ID: <199903161703.MAA28602@sheffield.cnchost.com>
>
> When the world was young, Raven <raven@Tribe.OnlineToday.Com>
> carved some runes like this:
>
> > I keep seeing this fight going on in samba-log.nmb, is there a
> > way to make certain the Linux box remains the master browser
> > period? The Linux box is TRIBE the Win95 box is RAVEN:
> [snip]
> >
> > Linux 2.0.34, P166, 32 Megs of RAM (RedHat 5.1), Samba version
1.9.18p5
> >
> > I set smb.conf os level to 33 (I thought that would help but no dice).
>
> I have OS level set to 65 (although 33 *should* beat win95 in
> browser elections). Does your linux box stay up all the time, oe
> are you shutting it down every day? The other thing you can do is
> turn off the clients, ie, in File and Printer Sharing properties
> (under Network Properties) set browse master to Disable (the
> default is Auto).
>
> Steve
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> Stephen L Arnold http://www.rain.org/~sarnold
> #include <std_disclaimer.h>
> ******************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:09:23 -0800
> From: "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Re: Domain logon problems
> Message-ID: <199903161703.MAA28589@sheffield.cnchost.com>
>
> When the world was young, "David Grant"
<tijian_bbs@hotmail.com>
> carved some runes like this:
>
> > I have samba correctly setup to share resources between my linux box
and
> > my win98 clients (The encrypted passwording disabled
> accoringly). I tried
> > to configure it for domain logons with my win98 clients, by
> enabling WINS
> > server, domain logons, and master browser in the smb.conf. When
> I login on
> > my win98 machine, I get an error saying that the password is incorrect
> > (which it isn't) or the server has denied my access. I get the
> same error
> > in the log that I would get if I hadn't disabled encrypted
passwords.
>
> Did you enable Domain Logons on the clients?
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> Stephen L Arnold http://www.rain.org/~sarnold
> #include <std_disclaimer.h>
> ******************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:09:23 -0800
> From: "Stephen L Arnold" <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Re: dos?
> Message-ID: <199903161703.MAA28576@sheffield.cnchost.com>
>
> When the world was young, <vball@socrates.berkeley.edu> carved some
> runes like this:
>
> > I have an old dos app that doesn't run in the win95 shell very
well.
> > There are problems with the graphics.
> > Is it possible to connect to a samba server from real dos? I assume
the
> > answer is no but I thought I would check.
>
> Yes, if you have the MS-TCP/IP client. See the samba docs...
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> Stephen L Arnold http://www.rain.org/~sarnold
> #include <std_disclaimer.h>
> ******************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:28:21 +0100
> From: "Per-Erik Persson" <per-erik.persson@commentor.se>
> To: "samba mailinglist" <samba@samba.org>
> Subject: nmbd daemon dies
> Message-ID: <01be6fd2$636b6330$65a047c2@d101.commentor.se>
>
> I'm runnig Samba version 1.9.18p10 on a Redhat 5.1 Intel platform with
256
> Mb ram and 45 Gb disk.
> It serves about 50 clients running win95 with the Samba server as the WINS
> server
> The system has worked fine for several months since installation with no
> reboots.
> But recently the nmbd deamon quit working, sometimes there are two daemons
> running.
> It has to be killed and then started again or i have to send it a SIGHUP.
> The log.nmbd does look normal, no strange things there.
>
> What should i look for to find the problem or is this something
> wich can be
> solved with an upgrade.
> When i read the mailinglist i get pretty frightend with all the
> 2.* problems
> i see.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 12:39:44 -0500
> From: "Nelson, John P." <NelsonJP@genrad.com>
> To: "'samba@samba.org'" <samba@samba.org>
> Subject: RE: SAMBA digest 2023
> Message-ID:
<30784F9ABC1ED211BABA00805F9593FDD1046F@corpmail2.genrad.com>
>
> It's possible, but nontrivial.
>
> You can load the "Microsoft Network Client 3.0 for MSDOS"
software, a free
> download from ftp.microsoft.com (look in /bussys/Clients/MSCLIENT). You
> need to load the full redirector because you need TCP/IP support
> to access a
> Samba server. Oh, I'm not sure if it does encrypted passwords,
> either: it
> may only support plaintext passwords.
>
> This can take some work to configure properly, and all those
> network modules
> take a lot of DOS memory (try to start with as much UMB memory as
> you can),
> but it works.
>
> I can't really help you further, it's been at least three years
since I've
> used a standalone DOS PC.
>
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:48:40 -0800 (PST)
> > From: <vball@socrates.berkeley.edu>
> > To: samba@samba.org
> > Subject: dos?
> > Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.990315134523.5978B-100000@socrates>
> >
> > I have an old dos app that doesn't run in the win95 shell very
well.
> > There are problems with the graphics.
> > Is it possible to connect to a samba server from real dos? I assume
the
> > answer is no but I thought I would check.
> >
> > Verne Ball
> > vball@socrates.berkeley.edu
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:15:13 -0300
> From: Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <jcastro@pcshop.com.br>
> To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
> Subject: Re: dos?
> Message-ID: <36EEADC1.529A8562@pcshop.com.br>
>
> Stephen L Arnold wrote:
> >
> > When the world was young, <vball@socrates.berkeley.edu> carved
some
> > runes like this:
> >
> > > I have an old dos app that doesn't run in the win95 shell
very well.
> > > There are problems with the graphics.
> > > Is it possible to connect to a samba server from real dos? I
> assume the
> > > answer is no but I thought I would check.
> >
> > Yes, if you have the MS-TCP/IP client. See the samba docs...
>
> ??? Is there such a beast??? I downloaded the MS Network Client and was
> despaired to realize it didn't support TCP/IP. I browsed the Samba docs
> and found nothing (maybe I didn't look right). How can I find this
> client?
>
> --
> ___THE___ One man alone cannot fight the future. USE LINUX!
> \ \ / / _______________________________________________
> \ V / |Juan Carlos Castro y Castro |
> \ / |jcastro@pcshop.com.br |
> / \ |Linuxeiro, alvinegro, X-Phile e Carioca Folgado|
> / ^ \ |Diretor de Inform?tica e Eventos Sobrenaturais |
> / / \ \ |da E-RACE CORPORATION |
> ~~~ ~~~ -----------------------------------------------
> RACER
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:04:11 +0100 (CET)
> From: Iztok Polanic <iztok@hakl-hakl.si>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Samba Problems! Please help!
> Message-ID:
> <Pine.LNX.4.10.9903162053210.1708-100000@localhost.localdomain>
>
> Hello !!!
>
> I have couple of questions regading samba.
>
> 1. I have just installed samba on my computer. It works great and I can
> mount all Windows computers, except NT. When I try "smbmount
> //192.168.1.4/C /mnt/test" I get this error:
>
> Password:
> smb_get_length: Invalid NBT packet
> smb_dont_catch_keepalive: server->data_ready == NULL
> smb_dont_catch_keepalive: server->data_ready == NULL
> mount error: Invalid argument
> Please look at smbmount's manual page for possible reasons
>
> I get the same message in /var/log/message. What does this mean? What
> should I do to change this?
>
> The strangest this is, that I can access to NTs' with smbclient
> ("smbclient \\\\192.168.1.4\\C") and I get this:
>
> Unknown parameter encountered: ": writable"
> Ignoring unknown parameter ": writable"
> Added interface ip=192.168.1.7 bcast=192.168.1.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
> session request to 192.168.1.4 failed
> Password:
>
> And it works just fine. I'm very concerd about the 1st, 2nd and 4th
line,
> because I don't know what they mean. Where can I fix this writable? I
> already checked /etc/smb.conf but I didn't find anything.
>
> 2. I also want to use printer (Epson Stylus Color) which is attached to
> Windows NT. Because I'm not used to setuping printers under Linux (this
is
> my first one) I have difficulties. My /etc/printcap looks like this:
>
> lp:\
> :cm=Epson Stylus Color on NT:\
> :lp=/dev/null:\
> :sd=/var/spool/lpd/lp:\
> :af=/var/spool/lpd/lp/acct:\
> :mx#0:\
> :if=/usr/bin/smbprint:
>
> and .config file
>
> server=192.168.1.4
> service=EPSON
> password=""
>
> Can someone send me his files for setting up the printer. I would really
> appreciate if you would answer to my questions, because you're my last
> hope (I tried every redhat-list, linux.samba news group, linux networking
> etc)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bye.
>
> //////
> ( o o )
> /------------oOO-----O-----OOo------------\
> | From: Iztok Polanic |
> | E-mail: iztokp@amis.net |
> | WWW: http://come.to/kotzi |
> \-----------------------------------------/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:25:10 +1100
> From: Anthony David <adavid@adavid.netinfo.net>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> Message-ID: <199903162025.HAA03733@adavid.netinfo.net>
>
> From: Ben Kosse <BKosse@thecreek.com>
> >
> > I don't get it. They give it a con because of:
> > "Tricky to configure; expensive maintenance."
> >
> > But in the article:
> > "Although Samba is free, SGI charges $1,500 for a maintenance
> contract that
> > ensures enterprise-level support for any SGI-Samba
> installation. *This is a
> > low price when compared with NetWare and NT,*" (Emph mine).
> >
> > What gives?
>
> Call your hardware supplier with a Samba problem and see what they say.
>
> I am not affiliated with SGI, however I have been on the receiving end
> of Jeremy's prompt and concise support.
>
> SGI are offering Samba as a "Fully Supported Product"(or whatever
spin
> the marketeers put on the title) I am very happy to see SGI support
> Jeremy's work and naturally SGI would like to see a return on their
> investment.
>
> Services is where the Free Software Model is supposed to be compatible
> with commercial enterprises. There is no limit to how much you can
> spend on Free Software. SGI are not selling a license to Samba, they
> are selling a support contract.
>
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:jallison@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, March 15, 1999 5:36 PM
> > > To: Multiple recipients of list
> > > Subject: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > PC Week just published a review of Samba 2.0.x.
> > >
> > > Details (under the dreadful title of
> > > "Samba up-tempo performer" :-) at :
> > >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/products/stories/reviews/0,4161,394079,00.html
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Jeremy Allison,
> > Samba Team.
> >
> > PS. Full disclaimer here, the review is of Samba on a
> > SGI Origin 200, and I work for SGI.
>
> --
> Anthony David | Save Ferris
> Anthony David & Associates | Free Truman
> http://adavid.netinfo.net/ | Redeem Londo
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:30:27 -0800
> From: "Dave Walton" <walton@emusic.com>
> To: Anthony David <adavid@adavid.netinfo.net>, samba@samba.org
> Subject: RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> Message-ID: <19990316233031.7391.qmail@modgud.nordicdms.com>
>
> On 17 Mar 99, at 7:25, Anthony David wrote:
>
> > From: Ben Kosse <BKosse@thecreek.com>
> > >
> > > I don't get it. They give it a con because of:
> > > "Tricky to configure; expensive maintenance."
> > >
> > > But in the article:
> > > "Although Samba is free, SGI charges $1,500 for a
maintenance
> contract that
> > > ensures enterprise-level support for any SGI-Samba
> installation. *This is a
> > > low price when compared with NetWare and NT,*" (Emph mine).
> > >
> > > What gives?
> >
> > Services is where the Free Software Model is supposed to be compatible
> > with commercial enterprises. There is no limit to how much you can
> > spend on Free Software. SGI are not selling a license to Samba, they
> > are selling a support contract.
>
> I think Ben's question is: Why do they give it low marks for
> "expensive maintenance" when they go on to say "This is a
low
> price when compared with NetWare and NT"? Is it expensive or
> low-priced?
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dave Walton
> Webmaster, Postmaster Emusic
> walton@emusic.com http://www.emusic.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:21:17 -0800 (PST)
> From: Brian Bagnall <bbagnall@sonic.Aureal.com>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Problems with timely writes from win98
> Message-ID: <199903170321.TAA13495@dutch.aureal.com>
>
>
> It takes up to 45 minutes to write a file to disk from win98.
> The file appears to be written from the win98 side but
> is not actually updating on the disk until 45 minutes later.
>
> I am running 2.0.2 and I have just looked at the oplocks options
> and I am implementing it now. But this seems like a larger problem
> due to the incredibly long delay.
>
> Can someone direct me to some documentation about this?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 16:18:00 +0800
> From: YongPeng_Yao@notes.seagate.com
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Re: SAMBA digest 1944
> Message-ID: <88256737.002D7026.00@sv-gw1.stsv.seagate.com>
>
> My linux box is RH5.1 & samba-1.9.18, after I exec smbclient -L cuda,
it
> show me:
>
> Added interface ip=10.4.15.41 bcast=10.4.15.255 nmask=255.255.240.0
> startlmhosts: Can't open lmhosts file /etc/lmhosts. Error was No such
file
> or directory
> Server time is Wed Mar 17 16:15:51 1999
>
> Another problem is that from Win95 network neighborhood I can see
> the samba
> server,
> but when I want to login it ask me password, I have set 'guest account
> nobody'.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:35:12 +0100
> From: Miquel Bonastre <miquel@fib.upc.es>
> To: samba@samba.org
> Subject: Re: Domain logon problems
> Message-ID: <36EF7750.396E2C7F@fib.upc.es>
>
>
> > From: "David Grant" <tijian_bbs@hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Domain logon problems
> >
> > I have samba correctly setup to share resources between my linux box
and
> > my win98 clients (The encrypted passwording disabled accoringly). I
> > tried to configure it for domain logons with my win98 clients, by
> > enabling WINS server, domain logons, and master browser in the
smb.conf.
> > When I login on my win98 machine, I get an error saying that the
> > password is incorrect (which it isn't) or the server has denied my
> > access. I get the same error in the log that I would get if I
hadn't
> > disabled encrypted passwords.
>
> Are there any other WinNT in your network?
> This is a very important point. We had similar problems
> caused a WinNT that answered before samba can reply.
>
> --
> Miquel Bonastre (miquel@fib.upc.es)
> Area de Sistemes Unix (LCFIB)
> Facultat d'Informatica de Barcelona
> Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:52:23 +0200
> From: Alex Fichman <fichman@ipexsoft.co.il>
> To: "'samba@samba.org'" <samba@samba.org>
> Subject: Attaching Samba to NT domain
> Message-ID:
<80A9F6F6A5CFD211A75500104B11AFEE03BA38@mail.ipexsoft.co.il>
>
> Hi all.
> I am an NT specialist and quite new to Samba (and fairly to Linux).
> I am trying to set up an experimental Samba Server using Samba 2.03 on
> Mandrake 5.3 (basically an improved Red-Hat 5.2) and the default kernel
> 2.0.36.
> I followed the HowTos, using Swat in a manner I thought successful.
> Doesn't work.
> Have no Wins server, using DHCP (successful), caching DNS only
> (using ISP's
> for real work). Network consists of PDC, BDC and hybrid NTwks/98
> clients. NT
> servers are all SP4 and some of the NT clients too. ALL run NetBEUI (for
> security reasons) and most TCP/IP (only 1 segment). PDC runs both
> protocols,
> BDC runs NB only (file server).
> Samba server isn't seen by master browser.
> Smbclient -L SambaMachine asks for password and whatever supplied is
> incorrect. The Samba server is set to send authentication to PDC; does it
> need the smbpasswd file?
>
> Help appreciated,
> Alexander F.
> Ipex Software Ind.
> Network Administrator
> mailto:fichman@ipexsoft.co.il <mailto:fichman@ipexsoft.co.il>
> voice: 972-7-6286050 #217
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 8:39:30 EST
> From: Rich_Jones@wmg.com
> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <samba@samba.org>,
<walton@emusic.com>
> Subject: RE: Samba 2.0.x review published at PC Week.
> Message-ID: <vines.Hyc7+G0vvqB@corp.wmg.com>
>
> Hi,
>
> Its sad to see the rags still touting "If it ain't Microsoft, it
> ain't good."
>
> ZDNet is a prime example. After a year of spewing garbage
> about Linux,
> and how a Microsoft world would be better, they too are starting to see
> that spewing FUD for MS has damaged their rep (what little they
> had) among
> the upper echelon of techdom. Turn your back to *true* innovation, thats
> the real crime. These mags don't realize, the more they spread the
FUD,
> the more they expose themselves as not a true consumer magazine.
>
> When I first worked with Samba, I found it very overwhelming... but
> then all I had to do was read. The Samba book was an excellent idea, and
> helped grasp the complex concepts. Now, I love using Samba. I
> think it is
> one of my most loved apps. :) It is SO flexible, and solid.
>
> I've been running Samba for NFS and CD-ROM shares for
> nearly 6 months
> at work. There are plans to add more servers with similar
> functionality.
> The little P166/32 sits there chugging away with a decent flow of
> hits from
> the users, none of which had brought it to its knees.
>
> I find Samba coming in to releive spots where NT just up and dies
> (file/print/apps). In other words, the only thing that the NT can do is
> Mail (Exchange ugh) and Login. How would that work if you ran a
> Samba PDC
> for login, and needed to use Exchange? My feelings is to
> standardize with
> the rest of the world, and use sendmail (IBM's secured sendmail
> prolly) and
> Innosoft's LDAP for directory services.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Jones
>
> ps- These opinions are my own, not my employers.
> -------------
> Original Text
> From: "Dave Walton" <walton@emusic.com>, on 03/16/99 6:35
PM:
> On 17 Mar 99, at 7:25, Anthony David wrote:
>
> > From: Ben Kosse <BKosse@thecreek.com>
> > >
> > > I don't get it. They give it a con because of:
> > > "Tricky to configure; expensive maintenance."
> > >
> > > But in the article:
> > > "Although Samba is free, SGI charges $1,500 for a
maintenance
> contract
> that
> > > ensures enterprise-level support for any SGI-Samba
> installation. *This
> is a
> > > low price when compared with NetWare and NT,*" (Emph mine).
> > >
> > > What gives?
> >
> > Services is where the Free Software Model is supposed to be compatible
> > with commercial enterprises. There is no limit to how much you can
> > spend on Free Software. SGI are not selling a license to Samba, they
> > are selling a support contract.
>
> I think Ben's question is: Why do they give it low marks for
> "expensive maintenance" when they go on to say "This is a
low
> price when compared with NetWare and NT"? Is it expensive or
> low-priced?
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dave Walton
> Webmaster, Postmaster Emusic
> walton@emusic.com http://www.emusic.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of SAMBA Digest 2024
> ************************
>