samba - May 2003 - Samba 2.2.8a not plaing nice with tcpd under Solaris8

I'm having a problem with Samba v2.2.8a under Solaris with tcp wrappers.
Here's my current setup:

Software:
Solaris8 w/current recommended patch cluster
gcc v3.2.2
Samba 2.2.8a with the following config directives: --prefix=/server/sw/18
--with-acl-support
tcpd v7.6

Inetd.conf lines:
netbios-ssn     stream  tcp     nowait  root    /opt/common/sbin/tcpd  
/server/sw/prod_samba/sbin/smbd -D
netbios-ns      dgram   udp     wait    root    /opt/common/sbin/tcpd  
/server/sw/prod_samba/sbin/nmbd -D


What's happening is tha Samba will work fine in stand-alone mode or via
inetd so long as I'm not using tcpd. When I use the lines above I get the
following when I try to connect with "smbclient -L
fubar.cit.cornell.edu"
on the client side:
added interface ip=128.253.114.116 bcast=128.253.114.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
added interface ip=172.16.209.1 bcast=172.16.209.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
session request to FUBAR.CIT.CORNE failed (Call returned zero bytes (EOF)
)
session request to FUBAR failed (Call returned zero bytes (EOF)
)
session request to *SMBSERVER failed (Call returned zero bytes (EOF)
)


On the server side I see the following in the log:
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 3] smbd/server.c:main(831)
  loaded services
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 3] smbd/server.c:main(846)
  Becoming a daemon.
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 8] lib/util.c:fcntl_lock(1308)
  fcntl_lock 6 34 0 1 2
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 8] lib/util.c:fcntl_lock(1346)
  fcntl_lock: Lock call successful
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 5] smbd/connection.c:claim_connection(156)
  claiming  0
[2003/05/06 12:23:11, 0] lib/util_sock.c:open_socket_in(804)
  bind failed on port 139 socket_addr = 0.0.0.0.
  Error = Address already in use


The odd thing is that Samba v2.2.5 works in this configuration with the
tcpd I have and the smb.conf file I'm using. There's no extraneous Samba
daemons running and the /etc/services file has the right entries. I'm
completely at a loss why Samba would die when using tcp wrappers but not
in any other case.

Has anyone seen this type of problem or has any ideas where to start
looking for the cause of this behavior? I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks for your help.

     Lee


-- 
Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to
prove that the other party is unfit to rule, and both commonly succeed,
and are right. - H. L. Mencken