samba announce - Sep 2003 - Samba-3.0.0 RC4 available for download

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The Samba Team is proud to announce the availability of the
fourth release candidate of the Samba 3.0.0 code base.  A release
candidate implies that the code is very close to a final release,
but remember that this is still a non-production snapshot intended
for testing purposes.  Use it at your own risk.

The main issue addressed in this release relates to 
multibyte character sets.

The source code can be downloaded from :

    http://download.samba.org/samba/ftp/rc/

The uncompressed tarball and patch file have been signed
using GnuPG.  The Samba public key is available at

    http://download.samba.org/samba/ftp/samba-pubkey.asc

Binary packages are available at

    http://download.samba.org/samba/ftp/Binary_Packages/

A simplified version of the CVS log of updates since 3.0.0rc3
can be found in the the download directory under the name
ChangeLog-3.0.0rc3-3.0.0rc4.  The release notes are available
on-line at

    http://www.samba.org/samba/whatsnew/samba-3.0.0rc4.html

Please file any bugs you find in this release at

    https://bugzilla.samba.org/

As always, all bugs are our responsibility.

                                  --Enjoy
                                  The Samba Team




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/

iD8DBQE/YrljIR7qMdg1EfYRAsmiAJ0fxDkaHYL6UJQp9jrh+Xe1/8vs/wCglOXD
NSPgyvsV6LppS42Ji0STpbU=r2vR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Am Sa, 2003-09-13 um 08.29 schrieb Gerald (Jerry) Carter:
> The Samba Team is proud to announce the availability of the
> fourth release candidate of the Samba 3.0.0 code base.  A release
from whatsnew:

10) Remove getpwnam() calls from init_sam_from_xxx().  This means 
    that %u & %g will no longer expand in the "login ..." set of 
    smb.conf options, but %U and %G still do. The payback is that 

from smb.conf:

       %U     session user name (the user name  that  the  client
              wanted,  not  necessarily  the same as the one they
              got).


Does this definition of %U still apply? I hope not, because my usage of
'logon script' and especially 'logon path' depends on the real
unix
username (and not something possibly mixed-type from the windows login
screen).

regards
Dariush