On Sun, September 5,402 1993, Justin B Rye wrote:
> The references to LanManager in the short descriptions of so many
> samba packages are unhelpful.
The Samba (3) suite has had a facelift, but Samba4 has now entered
Sid with its old package descriptions intact, full of early-nineties
topical refe
Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> No - your wording makes it sound like SMB2 is the main feature of Samba 4.
> It's just a
> minor part of Samba 4 and Samba 3 will probably support it as well soon.
Does this mean you want to keep the line about supporting "Windows,
NT, OS/2 and DOS clients", or is it ju
Am Montag, den 21.07.2008, 19:07 +0100 schrieb Justin B Rye:
> > Samba 4 is not specifically aimed at supporting SMB2 however - it supports
> > SMB itself
> > just as well. SMB2 is also disabled by default.
> You're agreeing with me - it does specifically aim at adding support
> for SMB2
Package: samba4
Followup-For: Bug #486370
(Messages sent only to the Debian BTS won't reach me until I get
round to checking bugs.debian.org by hand. Please CC me, or maybe
debian-l10n-english.)
> Thanks for the bugreport. I agree the references to LanManager are a
> bit out of date, and are at
Package: samba4
Version: 4.0.0~alpha4~20080522-1
Severity: minor
The references to LanManager in the short descriptions of so many
samba packages are unhelpful.
For a start, as I understand it, its name was "LAN Manager", not
"LanManager"; up until about version 2.1 it couldn't do SMB, and
soon a
5 matches
Mail list logo
