On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 13:44 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Derrick MacPherson wrote:
>
> > Am I better of with samba 2 or 3?
>
> Defenitely Samba-3. Samba-2 is considered end-of-life by the Samba
> developers and no longer maintained, not even security fixes.
Thanks Henrik
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Derrick MacPherson wrote:
Am I better of with samba 2 or 3?
Defenitely Samba-3. Samba-2 is considered end-of-life by the Samba
developers and no longer maintained, not even security fixes.
Regards
Henrik
-Original Message-
From: Derrick MacPherson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 1:04 PM
To: squid
Subject: [squid-users] freebsd and squid - samba 2 or 3?
Am I better of with samba 2 or 3? I want to auth to w2k server and only
allow out members of one group. I'm having pro
Am I better of with samba 2 or 3? I want to auth to w2k server and only
allow out members of one group. I'm having problems getthing it working
with samba3, and wondering if i should change. I've been playing with
the config a lot and have gotten non IE browsers working with:
auth_param basic prog
