> > This is the latest stable release of Samba. This is the version that > > all production Samba servers should be running for all current > > bug-fixes. > I'm not sure if I would agree with the Samba teams definition of 'stable'. > This sounds pretty 'unstable' to me. Granted it is worth a development > look but to suggest it be installed on all production servers, IMHO is a > bit of a stretch for the Samba team to make. This version of Samba has been running for several months on more production servers then there are people using e-smith (e.g. Mandrake 8.1 comes out of the box with Samba 2.2.2). Saying that this version is 'unstable' is saying that 2.2.1a is unstable as they are the same code line with bug fixes (excluding the new winbindd deamon). Have a look at the section of the Samba site that explains the different versions.
I have no idea why winbind was released at this phase as it's only been around for about six months or so. It was my impression that is was slated to be released with version 3.0. Yes, I agree that this deamon is not 100% stable and does not work with a Samba PDC. Winbindd has no influence what so ever on the smbd and nmbd deamons. It's simply another service available with the Samba Suite (i.e., not required to run samba). In fact winbindd cannot even run on an e-smith machine as it requires linux 2.4 kernel. > I'll load it up on my test server but I don't think I'll be putting it on > a production server just yet. Why? Samba 2.2.2 is more stable than 2.2.1a as it is 2.2.1a with bug fixes. For example, there are multiple issues with Samba 2.2.1a and Win2k SP2 and WinXP that have been resolved in Samba 2.2.2. Greg Zartman -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
