Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:55:43AM -0500, David Brodbeck wrote: > Will there be a 2.2.6a release to fix the file descriptor leak bug that was > recently patched? Probably. I'm talking with Jerry about it. The problem is there's no admin parameter to turn off kernel change notify on Linux so you haev to recompile (this is bad). I'll probably add such a parameter if we do. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
Will there be a 2.2.6a release to fix the file descriptor leak bug that was recently patched? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:32:42AM +0100, Markus Schabel wrote: > Andrew Bartlett wrote: > >Depending on how you also use LDAP, there are some good reasons to move > >to 3.0. In HEAD, pdb_ldap now has connection caching, and does not > >modify unchanged attributes (these benefits provided by metze, who has > >the significant advantage of using samba on a large and complex ldap > >infrastructure). > > > I'm not sure if this is helpful when replicating the complete Directory > to the Samba-Server, but at least it sounds good. I'm not sure what you mean here. metze has been working on some of the consequences of running Samba on an OpenLDAP slave, we need to take account of the replication time otherwise we add a user then return that they don't exist. > >We hope to move this stuff into the next 3.0 alpha. > > > >Samba 3.0 also adds 'ldap passwd sync', to help keep the LDAP and SMB > >passwords in sync. > > > I guess that's really helpful for us. > > Do the computer accounts still need to be full posix users? It would > simplify things a bit if not. No, with the ldapsam_nua hack, this is not required. I'm going to look into making this work better when I get a chance. Andrew Bartlett -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
Andrew Bartlett wrote: Markus Schabel wrote: John H Terpstra wrote: On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of samba_2_2 CVS branch. Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. So there will never be a stable samba again? ;) :-) great, at least one realized that this was a joke ;) We hope that this will be our last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we would not recommend it's use in a production environment. We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. If it is not broken then why fix it? the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and 2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5) I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the direction I should be heading? Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run the actual CVS parallel Depending on how you also use LDAP, there are some good reasons to move to 3.0. In HEAD, pdb_ldap now has connection caching, and does not modify unchanged attributes (these benefits provided by metze, who has the significant advantage of using samba on a large and complex ldap infrastructure). I'm not sure if this is helpful when replicating the complete Directory to the Samba-Server, but at least it sounds good. We hope to move this stuff into the next 3.0 alpha. Samba 3.0 also adds 'ldap passwd sync', to help keep the LDAP and SMB passwords in sync. I guess that's really helpful for us. Do the computer accounts still need to be full posix users? It would simplify things a bit if not. regards Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Markus Schabel wrote: > John H Terpstra wrote: > > >On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: > > > >>Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of > >>samba_2_2 CVS branch. > >> > >> > >Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. ^^ latest != last ;) > > > So there will never be a stable samba again? ;) > > >We hope that this will be our > >last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 > >readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we > >would not recommend it's use in a production environment. > > > >>We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. > >> > >> > >If it is not broken then why fix it? > > > the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and > 2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5) > > >>I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the > >>direction I should be heading? > >> > >> > >Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. > > > I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess > with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run > the actual CVS parallel > > regards > > -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
Markus Schabel wrote: > > John H Terpstra wrote: > > >On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: > > > >>Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of > >>samba_2_2 CVS branch. > >> > >> > >Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. > > > So there will never be a stable samba again? ;) :-) > >We hope that this will be our > >last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 > >readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we > >would not recommend it's use in a production environment. > > > >>We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. > >> > >> > >If it is not broken then why fix it? > > > the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and > 2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5) > > >>I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the > >>direction I should be heading? > >> > >> > >Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. > > > I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess > with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run > the actual CVS parallel Depending on how you also use LDAP, there are some good reasons to move to 3.0. In HEAD, pdb_ldap now has connection caching, and does not modify unchanged attributes (these benefits provided by metze, who has the significant advantage of using samba on a large and complex ldap infrastructure). We hope to move this stuff into the next 3.0 alpha. Samba 3.0 also adds 'ldap passwd sync', to help keep the LDAP and SMB passwords in sync. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 09:17, Markus Schabel wrote: > John H Terpstra wrote: > > >On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: > > > >>Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of > >>samba_2_2 CVS branch. > >> > >> > >Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. > > > So there will never be a stable samba again? ;) > Note the te in that word? Hopefully 3.X will be stable. > >We hope that this will be our > >last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 > >readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we > >would not recommend it's use in a production environment. > > Hooray! > >>We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. > >> > >> > >If it is not broken then why fix it? > > > the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and > 2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5) > > >>I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the > >>direction I should be heading? > >> > >> > >Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. > > > I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess > with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run > the actual CVS parallel > > regards > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
John H Terpstra wrote: On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of samba_2_2 CVS branch. Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. So there will never be a stable samba again? ;) We hope that this will be our last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we would not recommend it's use in a production environment. We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. If it is not broken then why fix it? the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and 2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5) I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the direction I should be heading? Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run the actual CVS parallel regards -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote: > > > Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of > samba_2_2 CVS branch. Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release. We hope that this will be our last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0 readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we would not recommend it's use in a production environment. > We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. If it is not broken then why fix it? > > I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the > direction I should be heading? Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback. - John T. -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?
Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of samba_2_2 CVS branch. We've got six systems running it with no visible issues. I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the direction I should be heading? Bill -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
