×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Samba 2.2.0 Released

CmdrTaco posted about 13 years ago | from the look-what-we-got-kiddies dept.

Linux 174

Jeremy Allison wrote in to tell us that Samba 2.2.0 has been released. Of course, I'm sure everyone reading this knows what that means already, so I've attached the press release. Mostly this looks like its stuff for compatibility with Windows "We just changed enough to break everyone else" 2000's implementation of the protocol. Congrats to everyone involved with what is unquesitonably among the most important server apps on Linux.

Samba 2.2.0 - Powering the next generation of Network Attached Storage.

17 April 2001.

The Samba Team is proud to announce a new major release of Samba, version 2.2.0. This release includes significant feature enhancements for Samba, and sets the standard for UNIX® and Microsoft Windows® integration.

Enhancements include :

oIntegration of server terminated leases (Windows "oplocks") with UNIX NFS sharing (Linux 2.4 kernel and IRIX only). Complete data and locking integrity when sharing files between UNIX and Windows.

oAbility to act as an authentication source for Windows 2000® and Windows NT® clients, allowing savings on the purchase of Microsoft® Client Access Licenses.

oFull support for the automatic downloading of Windows 2000 and Windows NT printer drivers, providing the first full implementation of the Windows NT point-and-print functionality independent of Microsoft code.

oUnification of Windows 2000 and Windows NT Access control lists (ACLs) with UNIX Access control lists. Allow Windows clients to directly manipulate UNIX Access control entries as though they were Windows ACLs.

oSingle sign-on integration using the winbind server (available separately). Allow UNIX servers to use Windows 2000 and Windows NT Domain controllers as a user and group account server. Manage all user and group accounts from a single source.

oMicrosoft Distributed File System® (DFS) support. Samba 2.2.0 can act as a DFS server in a Microsoft network.

oShare level security setting. Allow security on Samba shares to be set by Microsoft client tools.

oMany other feature enhancements and bug fixes.

About Samba

Samba is an Open Source/Free Software implementation of the Microsoft CIFS/SMB protocols for UNIX systems. In development for ten years, Samba is considered to be the reference implementation of the CIFS/SMB protocol for UNIX systems. Samba test tools are used by all the CIFS/SMB vendors to test and fix their protocol implementations.

Samba is currently used in Network attached storage (NAS) and other products from the following vendors (Note: this does not imply endorsement by these vendors, please contact the vendor marketing departments separately for comments).

IBM®, SGI® (Samba for IRIX), Sun Microsystems ®(Cobalt Qube), Hewlett Packard® (CIFS/9000), VERITAS®, VA Linux Systems®, REALM Information Technologies ®, Network Concierge®, Procom ® and many others.

In addition, Samba is shipped as a standard part of Linux® offerings from Linux vendors such as Red Hat®, Caldera®, SuSE®, Mandrake®, TurboLinux ® and others.

Samba is being used worldwide to solve the problem of integrating hetrogeneous networks by corporations such as Agilent Technologies ®, CISCO Systems ®, and many others in addition to educational establishments and individuals

Best of all Samba is an Open Source/Free software project, available under the GNU GPL license meaning that source code for Samba is freely available for anyone to modify and customize.

Code from the Samba Team and individuals around the world has been integrated and tested to create Samba. In addition the following corporations have made significant donations of code, effort, testing facilities and support to make this release possible :

Linuxcare (now TurboLinux), VA Linux Systems, Caldera, SGI, Hewlett Packard, VERITAS, IBM.

This new release may be downloaded from our Web site at :

http://www.samba.org

For press enquiries about this release please contact either Jeremy Allison (jra@samba.org), Andrew Tridgell (tridge@samba.org) or John Terpstra (jht@samba.org).

Samba - the SOURCE for Windows Networking !

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

174 comments

Cost (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#284755)

Although Samba may be free, the skill and effort required to install and configure it is not. You have to consider the cost of employing someone with the required skills to do this versus the cost of a Windows license and a windows installation. Windows supports unattended installations which can be initiated with little or no effort, provided the configuration settings are correctly specified.

Re:new section (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#284756)

Yeah, and for once with colors that don't make you feel like puking.

Gosh, isn't it a UNIX app? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#284757)

Congrats to everyone involved with what is
unquesitonably among the most important server apps on Linux.


And here all this time I thought it was an important UNIX application. Oh, look. So do the authors of SAMBA.

I'm sure your corporate masters at the Open Source Developers Network love your attention to the ideals of pimping GNU/Linux.

Wha? (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 13 years ago | (#284758)

"Mostly this looks like its stuff for compatibility with Windows."

Umm...no shit. Isn't that the purpose of Samba?

Flamebait (3)

On Lawn (1073) | about 13 years ago | (#284764)

one man's flame is another man's fire...

His comments would have been more tempered if he said "environment they are used to" instead of "more stable, [yada]".

But that wouldn't be saying anything different.

/me ducks

Seriously though, having moved from a Linux environment to a Windows recently, I can attest that Windows is more stable these days than it was. But check this out, I just had to visit a company yesterday that I installed a samba server in over a year and a half ago.

I had never had to visit them since the time I installed it, until now that they are having hardware problems with the case its housed in. They aren't Linux gurus so I can attest that they haven't touched it.

I wonder if anyone can say they have a NT box in a production commercial environment that they haven't had to touch in 18 months, nay not even a reboot.

On my linux box at home, if my wife does something strange, like run tuxracer even though we don't have 3d acceloration, I can log in from work and fix it for her, while she is logged in and without stepping on what she is doing.

I know there is remote admin tools for NT and 2000, but honestly, they aren't as powerful and/or they interupt what the user is doing.

So, I hope this is more insiteful and evenhanded, but I don't need any more karma.


~^~~^~^^~~^

Re:Cost (2)

jnik (1733) | about 13 years ago | (#284767)

An interesting (and important) point, but ultimately a little off. Most linux distros also support unattended installation, but how many file servers do you really need? SAMBA being a primarily server-side app, it doesn't make much sense to do automated installs.
On top of that, administering a Windows network takes time, skill, and education, just as much as a UNIX network. MS talks about lower TCO if you just buy Windows, but that hasn't been borne out at my job.

We will know this is hurting MS when (2)

djKing (1970) | about 13 years ago | (#284768)

they will change the License for W2K cals.

They did the same thing when puting fast track or web site pro web server on NT Workstation was cheaper than getting NT Server + IIS for 'free'. They changed NT Worstation licence to say you couldn't have more than 10 tcp/ip clients at a time.

doh, that's what's driving WinXP.

-Peace
Dave

More Praise (2)

Alastair (3224) | about 13 years ago | (#284770)

Since we're all in a group hug now :-)

We (at work) have been using Samba for over a year now to serve a small workgroup of NT users. None of us (least of all me, the default sysadmin) are experienced NT or Windows users.

We recently switched our main server from an old (10 years?) SGI Indigo2 XL to a new Dell server - Samba 2.0.6 to 2.0.7. The process of compiling, installing and configuring Samba was straightforward and I can safely say that Samba is one of the most impressive and useful pieces of software I have ever used. Well done and many thanks to all responsible!

I should also put in a good word for O'Reilly for allowing the free distribution of the 'Using Samba' book - invaluable.

Maintaining mixed unix/NT can be a real chore (and I won't even mention Clearcase), but Samba has made it work beautifully. It's a pity that we also ended up with a Syntax TAS (Totalnet Advanced Server) system - purely for Clearcase ... it 'works' (well, actually it does), 'guaranteed support', 'recommended' ... :-/

At some point in the future, when I have time, I'd like to shift Clearcase, and it's SMB appendage TAS, to a Linux/Samba server - just to show it can be done. Then I could get rid of the Ultra5! Which would make me very happy :-)

Now if only there was an easy/cheap way to manage unix and NT users/groups from a unix machine, minus any NT server ofcourse.

Cheers!

--
Alastair
London UK

Re:Cost (1)

Malor (3658) | about 13 years ago | (#284771)

well yes, but the admin is $90K PER YEAR -- in theory, at least for now, the $40K is a once-off expense. And from a business perspective, spending $40K to save $40K/year makes excellent sense.

Flip side of the coin is that the $90K guy is probably going to be able to do a hell of a lot more than just basic administration. Whether or not this is worth it to a given company will mostly depend on whether they see IT as a strategic asset or as a cost center.

Re:Cost (1)

Malor (3658) | about 13 years ago | (#284772)

heh, I'm kind of arguing out of both sides of my mouth here.

My general experience with M$ versus Unix is that it takes four times as long to solve something in Unix, but once it's solved it's done and you never have to touch it again. With M$, you generally pay a lot more up front in licensing (compared to the free Unices), and you also pay a lot more in ongoing maintenance as stuff mysteriously breaks. If you need the services up instantly, use Windows. If you have some time to twiddle and a talented person to do the twiddling, Unix may be a better bet.

For the dotcoms, that were all about flash and sizzle, Windows made a lot of sense. For the companies who are in it for the long haul, I tend to think that Unix is a better solution a lot of the time. Probably the single most important factor is the overall skill level of the IT staff, with the caveat that if you don't push them a little they're not improving as fast as they might be. (note I said a LITTLE. :-) )

As an aside, W2K does seems substantially better than NT, but still not as good as Unix.

Re:Aussies (1)

dpash (5685) | about 13 years ago | (#284775)

The M1 bridge over Meadowhall impreses me. I'm impressed it hasn't fallen down yet.

Re:"authentication source"? (2)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284777)

But that's not the point of Samba. Want directory services ? Use OpenLDAP. Want Kerberos ? Use MIT Kerb5 or Heimdal. Want DNS ? Use bind. Want DHCP ? Use a dhcp daemon (University of Washington I think). Want Terminal Services ? Use X, or vnc.

Are you getting the picture ? :-).

You're comparing Samba, which is just the Windows file/print/authentication service for Windows clients on UNIX, with an entire Win2k/NT load.

You should be comparing a full UNIX/Linux distro. containing Samba to do a fair comparison.

Regards,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (2)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284778)

Check out sybase tools. MS-SQL server is wire compatible with Sybase (it uses TDS - Tabular Data Stream protocol. Proprietary though :-( ).

Standard Linux sybase tools should talk to SQL server no problem (at least they used to). I depended on this in a previous life :-).

Regards,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:Aussies (2)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284779)

I remember aquaplaning on that bloody thing. Nearly killed me :-). God I *hate* driving on the M1....

Have they knocked down the cooling towers yet ?
:-).

Jeremy.

Re:Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (2)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284781)

Already included in the 2.2.0 Samba. Look for the nsswitch "wins" module. I forgot to mention it (we've addeda *lot* of stuff :-).

Cheers,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

BTW: I just uploaded the Red Hat rpms for 2.2.0 for Red Hat 6.2 and 7.0 intel onto samba.org.

Re:Aussies (3)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284783)

I'm not a bloody Aussie, I've never even *been* to bloody Australia :-). I'm from *Sheffield* (where they do "the Full Monty" :-) :-).

You're thinking of *Andrew*. He's a bloody Aussie !

Bloody foreigners, not knowing the difference between Australia and the UK, I dunno... mumble, grumble....

:-).

Cheers,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:Why this is tremendous... (3)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284784)

This is why winbind is so useful for creating Samba appliances. No more local users or groups, just drop the thing into the NT domain and go....

Cheers,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:"authentication source"? (5)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284787)

It means it's not completely a PDC, 'cos it doesn't do replication or BDC Stuff yet - but it works well enough to put Windows 2000 or Windows NT clients into a Samba hosted domain, and have people log in and authenticate against it, and download profiles from it.

For many small sites this is all they need - not the full PDC stuff.

That's why I didn't say PDC, but used the phrase "authentication source".

Cheers,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:Point and click printing (5)

Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) | about 13 years ago | (#284788)

9x clients were already supported by the 2.0.x codebase. They're also supported in the same way that W2k/NT servers do it in this new release.

I didn't mention it 'cos we already had that functionality - so it wasn't news :-).

We've now got a *complete* (modulo bugs and one braindamage implementation issue, hang out on samba-technical@samba.org for details) implementation of W2k/NT point and print. That *includes* W9x driver download.

Cheers,

Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.

Re:Cost (2)

kraig (8821) | about 13 years ago | (#284790)


ditto.

YES, it takes more time (generally) to set up something under *nix than it does similar Windows services. However, would you rather put your budget into hiring a $90k admin who knows what s/he's doing, or into hiring a $50k admin who may or may not + $40k for licenses?

praise Him (1)

mvh (9295) | about 13 years ago | (#284791)

Praise the Lord, and Jeremy Allison. I just hope MS doesn't screw things up again. Samba is one of the best things to happen to Linux servers. I've personally been able to circumvent the purchase of 3 MS NT/2000 Servers because of the Samba team's good work and my personal propaganda.

Thanks.

"authentication source"? (2)

jms (11418) | about 13 years ago | (#284795)

o Ability to act as an authentication source for Windows 2000® and Windows NT® clients, allowing savings on the purchase of Microsoft® Client Access Licenses.

Can someone explain this? Does this version of Samba in essence emulate Microsoft's licensing agent, allowing free use of features that Microsoft wants you to pay for, or does this mean something else?

Sounds like something that could result in a tidal wave of lawsuits from Redmond.

Re:"authentication source"? (3)

jms (11418) | about 13 years ago | (#284796)

Someone needs to make an XBOX DVD with a ready-to-run SAMBA server on it. Pay $300.00, Plug XBOX into network, insert DVD, cancel
order for NT server.

ACL and XFS acl plus trusted linux (1)

johnjones (14274) | about 13 years ago | (#284800)

one of the SAMBA team lives @ SGI

XFS i hope will be in the kernel soon
(please linus )

intresting though is SGI released their trusted IRIX stuff and want a trusted linux

hope this does not clash with NSA stuff
(finaly the NSA doing their job of protecting people(US))

but how long are we going to have to wait until I can ditch my solaris boxen and say to the boss yes this is secure and supported AND from a company with nice PR people to keep him happy ?

regards

john jones

Re:Cost (1)

eswan (16407) | about 13 years ago | (#284801)

Interesting my ass.

> Although Samba may be free, the skill and effort required to install and configure it is not.
Bah.

cd /usr/src
curl http://us1.samba.org/samba/ftp/samba-latest.tar.gz > ./samba-latest.tar.gz
tar -xvzf ./samba-latest.tgz
cd samba-2.2.0/source
./configure
make install
/usr/local/samba/bin/swat &
and voila! nice preety gui for dem winders foks

As for the ease of configuring Windows, sure, it's real easy to set up. Badly. Tell me, are these inexpensive employees who can't install Samba going to be able to tell you if you're exposing the IPC$ share to the world? If you're allowing case-insensitive LANMAN passwords? Sounds like the guys running Microsoft's routers.
Not even going to comment on the 'supports unattended installations...provided the configuration settings are correctly specified.'

Re:"authentication source"? (2)

WiPEOUT (20036) | about 13 years ago | (#284805)

Windows clients typically authenticate against an Windows Server (be it NT4 or 2000). Each individual client connecting to the Server must have a Client Access License (CAL). Windows 2000 Server comes bundled with 5 CALs, and Windows 2000 Advanced Server comes with 25 CALs. Additional CALs can be purchased seperately. The important point is that CALs are only required if you want to connect to a Windows NT4/2000 Server.

For example, if you plan on having a network of 20 Windows 2000 Professional workstations connected to a single Windows 2000 Server, in addition to the 20 licenses for Windows 2000 Professional and 1 copy of Windows 2000 Server, you would need to purchase an additional 15 CALs.

By providing you with free server software, Samba eliminates the need to purchase CALs, as they are server-specific. In the above example, the customer would only need the 20 Windows 2000 Professional licenses.

WiPEOUT

Re:Aussies (1)

rhaig (24891) | about 13 years ago | (#284807)

we're just US'ians. and y'all talk funny, so y'all must be from the same place. right? :)

ACLs on Linux need patch. (3)

eMBee (27441) | about 13 years ago | (#284808)

Unification of Windows 2000 and Windows NT Access control lists (ACLs) with UNIX Access control lists. Allow Windows clients to directly manipulate UNIX Access control entries as though they were Windows ACLs.
to make this work on linux you need to apply the ACL patches [bestbits.at] to your kernel.

greetings, eMBee.
--

Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (2)

BeanThere (28381) | about 13 years ago | (#284809)

This might be a stupid (inexperienced question), but am I the only one who thinks it would be very useful to have Linux's hostname resolving scheme support Netbios name resolution? e.g. to be able to specify for example in /etc/host.conf something like "order hosts, netbios, bind" or something like that. So that typing (for example) "ping foo" would allow for a Netbios-named PC on the LAN called "foo"'s IP to be found, if it isn't in /etc/hosts, for example. We have a WinNT DHCP server on the LAN, and a Linux server that does some other stuff, and entirely Windows clients, so the Windows clients all get "random" IP addresses on startup. It's a pain to keep /etc/hosts up to date under this scheme, and its also a pain to use IP reservations for every client.

Apart from this probably esoteric setup, I'm sure there are many other possible useful applications for this to be supported (e.g. to recreate something like Windows Network Neighbourhood - how does the new KDE do this?). Seems to me "Linux as a workstation" could benefit seriously from this. You don't really want to be going around explaining the "smbclient" command parameters to every employee - in Windows this stuff "just works, point and click", at least from a user perspective.

Is something like this planned? Is it something that would perhaps be easier to support with the planned LibSMB?

Is this already possible and I just don't know how (or haven't tried recently)? Admittedly its been at least 6 months to a year since I last looked at this stuff. Sorry if it's a stupid question.

-----

DBD::ODBC (1)

snoman (35672) | about 13 years ago | (#284810)

Tried the unix ODBC clients? Specifically, perl's DBI driver: DBD::ODBC?

Should do the trick.

Yea!!! (1)

questionlp (58365) | about 13 years ago | (#284824)

It is really nice to see that Samba is getting a lot closer to a real Windows NT server! I have been using Samba 2.0.7 where I work and it has worked very well (although we don't have a lot of people using it, but it works).

DFS is a really nice feature to have, since a sysadmin can create a single SMB share that links to all of the other network shares... less to remember and less support calls like, ``where's such-and-such folder again?''.

Also being able to edit the ACL directly from a Windows NT/2000 workstation is nice... probably won't have to do a lot of chown/chmod-ing again :)

Re:Flamebait (1)

phutureboy (70690) | about 13 years ago | (#284828)

So, I hope this is more insiteful and evenhanded, but I don't need any more karma.

Can I have your karma?

--

Re:Why this is tremendous... (1)

phutureboy (70690) | about 13 years ago | (#284829)

My boxes are all running SAMBA bound to an internal NIC

And would this not offer unfettered access to your internal network if one of the boxes was compromised through its public interface?

Might be better to have a staging server behind the firewall, and use rsync or something to update the public webservers.

Something to think about.

--

Re:a question for Jeremy Allison (or anybody) (1)

phutureboy (70690) | about 13 years ago | (#284830)

IIRC, smbmount/smbmnt is not really part of Samba, but rather a separate package which is included in the distro for the convenience of users. I seem to remember reading in the FAQ that you're on your own with questions about it.

Couldn't you make a shell script that contains a 'umount /mnt/winmachine' and then make that script suid?


--

Point and click printing (4)

0xA (71424) | about 13 years ago | (#284832)

Full support for the automatic downloading of Windows 2000 and Windows NT printer drivers, providing the first full implementation of the Windows NT point-and-print functionality independent of Microsoft code.


This is a huge acomplishment. Using samba's print services has always been a bit of a PITA in large networks. You get a print spooler that doesn't hang when you look at it funny but you had to install drivers for each printer on the workstations. Micrsoft's server products will automagicly provide a driver for clients when you connect to the shared printer, now samba does it too.

Hats of to Jeremy and the Samba team, this is a great feature.

Would have been kind of nice to see 9x clients supported too though.

Great Colors (OT) (2)

rkent (73434) | about 13 years ago | (#284833)

And if any slashdot editors are reading this, the colors in this section absolutely freakin' rule. Much better than YRO, for instance, which has always made me feel like puking.

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

witz (79173) | about 13 years ago | (#284835)

I think 2k Server comes with 10, not 5. I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections you're allowed on 2k Pro and ME. Not that it matters much...

Nope, you're wrong. There is a retail version of Server that comes with 10 licenses. These are server-based licenses, not CALs. IE concurrent user licensing, not enterprise-wide CALs. Unless it actually says "Client Access License", it's a server-based license which means every server has to be licensed for 25 users if 25 users at a time will be connecting in any way. As soon as you have multiple servers, it's cheaper to go the CAL route and buy them seperately from your server license (you can get server licenses with no cals or concurrent licenses).
Win2k Pro has an inherent limitation of 10 connections for the native services (ICS, PWS, SMB, et al). This does not vary and cannot be increased without hacking the machine and violating the license agreement.

My question is what kind of affect, if any, this will have on Microsoft's Win 2k Sever Family sales. Having to bend over to pay for networking liscences (on top of server and workstation liscences) can't be all that popular among their customers.

Next to none. Generally businsses don't deploy Windows 2000 Server solely for authentication and file sharing. And medium, large and enterprise businsses make up more than 99% of server sales.
SAMBA will provide the most basic of directory services. Nothing like what NDS or Active Directory provide. Not to mention the other native services that Windows 2000 provides that Samba doesn't (IIS, RRAS, Media Services, Terminal Services, DHCP, DNS, PKI, etc.)

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

witz (79173) | about 13 years ago | (#284836)

First of all, Novell doesn't do seat-based licensing. It's server-based. IE X amount of licenses on a server, once you're past that point, no more connections allowed.
Their idea of seat-based licensing is to give you an enterprise license which gives you unlimited licensing per server. Yeah, that's great.
Let's see, you're a company with 60 Windows 2000 Servers in multiple departments scattered around the world. What would you rather have, the management of dealing with server-based concurrency licenses for each server (gee, does this server have 25 or 10 or 5?) or simply buying a CAL for every client you have, and just buying your 60 server licenses?
The latter is pretty damn simple to keep track of. I've been involved in environments with tons of server-based licenses all over (NT environments). It's a pain to deal with. CALs are easy. You can add servers anywhere in your environment and you don't have to worry about whether or not you have enough licenses to support its client load, since every client is already licensed to access any Windows 2000 server in your organization because of the CAL.

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

witz (79173) | about 13 years ago | (#284837)

Jeremy,
With all due respect, I wasn't the one who made the original comparison, asking if this was going to cut into Windows 2000 server sales (which it won't, many SAMBA converts would have just pirated Windows 2000 anyway).

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | about 13 years ago | (#284838)

Sounds like something that could result in a tidal wave of lawsuits from Redmond.

Normally that would be idiotic, but you can't boyc ott something you don't use.

MS-'kerberos' support (2)

fanatic (86657) | about 13 years ago | (#284840)

Does this have support for the bastardized non-open protocol MS created out of kerberos?

--

Samba browsing DAVE shares (1)

sparkmanC (93863) | about 13 years ago | (#284841)

Has anyone gotten this to work?
I always get "file not found" errors after using smbmount on a service shared from a Mac.
Can any of the samba hackers here help me?

Re:new section (2)

fsck! (98098) | about 13 years ago | (#284842)

Yeah, but they do feel a lot like freshmeat. I wonder if they realised that. It's cool though, since I have long since forgotten my fm account info.

Also, people that strongly believe that /. should not carry fm-like stories can just block this section.

--

Re:Cost (2)

OmegaDan (101255) | about 13 years ago | (#284843)

I find that when setting up sometning under unix, you can expect it to be working for a LONG time afterwords as well ... just recently at my place of employment I had to upgrade sendmail due to an ORBS warning, (which meant reconfiguring), and while it was a pain in the butt, one couldn't help but admire that the sendmail hadn't been touched since 1997 :)

Why this is tremendous... (2)

alexhmit01 (104757) | about 13 years ago | (#284845)

My boxes are all running SAMBA bound to an internal NIC, which lets me manage them from my Windows workstations. Whether I'm logged in at the office or VPN'ing in, I can reach my OpenBSD boxes and update websites, develop, etc.

I have the SAMBA servers as part of the domain, but it is a hacky solution. I map everyone's NT Domain name to a UNIX name, and they can access the appropriate files.

NT Domain integration was always a little strange. With SAMBA 2.2, the issues should be much cleaner. ACcording to the release, I don't need to create Unix AND NT users, I can just grant access to my NT Domains. This was theoretically possible before with pam_smb (or smb_pam) but was always a confusing mess.

Also, even if I need to create accounts for the users that log in, not having to create accounts for the users that ONLY access via SMB will be a blessing. Not having a bunch of accounts with shell false just to support SAMBA will make life easier.

Adding an NT File Server is a joke, I plug it in, join the domain, create local groups (if I want) and share files with the permissions. Easy as pie.

Doing the same on SAMBA was a pain because I needed to give each user a UNIX account. This meant that a server for 5-10 people was fine, but trying to give an arbitrary group access to the machine was a nightmare.

This will be a tremendous release, and I look forward to putting it on test servers soon and deploying it in production in the next few months.

Alex

A wager.... (1)

biohazard99 (114288) | about 13 years ago | (#284847)

Scheduled release for Windows XP is in the near future, but I don't belive it has went gold yet, I say M$FT breaks everything again, or in a friendly windowsupdate patch soon after release.

Re:Aussies (2)

andy@petdance.com (114827) | about 13 years ago | (#284848)

I'm from *Sheffield* (where they do "the Full Monty" :-) :-).

Full Monty doesn't impress me. Def Leppard and Judas Priest, though: That impresses me.
--

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

mango (122103) | about 13 years ago | (#284850)

My first thought after reading Jeremy's comment is that all the other 'PDC stuff'/Domain stuff can already be done when your 'domain controllers' are all Unix/Samba boxen.

  1. Replication? LDAP, NIS, etc.
  2. Failover? again, there's already several ways to fail over apps between Unix boxen - just look at Samba as another app (albiet with it's own needs regarding fail-over
  3. and?...

Besides playing nice with existing Windows domain-controllers (Primary, Backup, and 2000-native) - what other benefits will Samba bring when it can take care of these issues?

Re:Cost (2)

pi_rules (123171) | about 13 years ago | (#284851)

Windows supports unattended installations...

I'm pretty sure that the install of NT we were trying around here today was attended by demonic spirits. If the monitor started spewing forth pea-soup like liquids at me it wouldn't have surprised me at all.

Justin Buist

Re:Aussies (1)

jallen02 (124384) | about 13 years ago | (#284852)

Dammit, your always smiling so much Jeremy. Hehe it forces me to smile :-) in :-) reply :-)

Me thinks your just happy to undermine :-) microsoft :-) with :-) samba :-)

Jeremy (Yeah its my name too:-)

(VERYOT)The color scheme is ripped from... (1)

yerricde (125198) | about 13 years ago | (#284853)

That's odd...I noticed the colors too. I was just thinking about how I like them better than the colors found on the rest of Slashdot.

Probably because they remind you of the spam-free experiences you've had on Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org], where YOU choose the stories. K5 uses #006699; Slashdot/developers uses #336699. The perceptual difference between sRGB #006699 and sRGB #336699 is negligible.

Differences between Slashdot and Freshmeat (2)

yerricde (125198) | about 13 years ago | (#284854)

Can't we just save everyone the trouble of bookmarking two sites and just glue /. and Freshmeat together

You don't call Slashdot "Slashf---ed" when it covers dot-com bad news [f---edcompany.com]. So why call it Slashmeat? Slashdot covers only newsworthy software releases. This includes packages critical to system and network structure (OS kernels, server software, major security patches, etc.) and "cool" stuff that fits the day's omelet. The new Developers section goes a long way toward this*. If you want, you can exclude this section in your user settings [slashdot.org] if you don't want to look at so-called "Slashmeat."

Either way, don't bother bookmarking two sites. A link to OSDN Freshmeat II [freshmeat.net] is in the OSDN box to the left of the textarea where I paste this very comment.

* It also may represent budget cuts in the OSDN division of VA Linux Systems Inc. [google.com] If scoop and Taco can work together nicely enough, the integration of Slashdot and Freshmeat may be a Good Thing for LNUX's bottom line [yahoo.com].

Compilers breaking because they're BROKE (2)

yerricde (125198) | about 13 years ago | (#284855)

And when Linux kernels rev and compilers break, this is....? Progress? Innovation?

The GCC developers are not as worried about backwards compatibility as they are about CORRECTNESS. If new features highlight optimization BUGS or standards NON-CONFORMANCES in a given compiler, the compiler is at fault. GCC has kept up very nicely. If you are worried about a new compiler breaking your old code, compile with gcc -Wall to show where your code relies on non-conforming misfeatures of old compilers.

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

Foochar (129133) | about 13 years ago | (#284856)

They are both CALs. Microsoft has two types of CALs, per server, and per seat. The per server CALs are connection based, the per seat CALs are not. Every CAL you buy is a "per server" CAL, however Microsoft allows you to convert them to "per seat" CALs.

Both licenses can make sense depending on your arangement. If you have a large number of users who make brief connections then a "per server" paradigm probably will be cheaper. For example if your server is only providing DNS services. On the other hand if your users make fairly permenant connections, or connect to multiple servers then per seat licensing is for you. My company has users store all their files on a network share. At the same time they may be accessing files stored on another server, or printing through a third server. By licensing on a per seat basis we don't have to worry about how many connections there are.

A lot of those other services you mention can be provided by a Linux server. DHCP and DNS are much more robust on a Linux server. Apache provides the same basic functionality as IIS. Terminal Services on the PDC are a bad idea so thats a moot point.

It all boils down to SAMBA having the potential to reduce the number of W2K systems in a mixed shop. In a pure W2K shop it takes something major to make management wake up and decide that some Linux makes sense. Things like a loss for the year or declining stock prices as a result of decreasing earnings.

Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (1)

tulassay (130175) | about 13 years ago | (#284859)

when talking about "enterprise-ready" open source software, PostgreSQL is definitely in there. (even more with their brand new 7.1 release)

Other Samba News (3)

istartedi (132515) | about 13 years ago | (#284860)

Fact:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/010417/0071.html [yahoo.com]

Opinion:

Slashdot mentioned VA Linux in this article. This makes it more difficult to complain about the lack of "full disclosure". On the other hand, important material information is still missing.

It seems that in an effort to appear unbiased, the editors are reluctant to post anything about VA Linux at all, even when it is perfectly legitimate to do so. VA Linux hiring top level Samba developers is major news. Don't be ashamed, be proud!

In their effort to avoid being perceived as a PR arm of VA Linux, they are being somewhat evasive and this is backfiring.

Re:"authentication source"? (2)

rgmoore (133276) | about 13 years ago | (#284861)

Of course SAMBA uses and even simple licensing scheme: connect as many clients as you want without any paperwork whatsoever. That's got to be a lot easier to deal with, don't you think?

Re:Point and click printing (1)

dan_bethe (134253) | about 13 years ago | (#284862)

I would think that typically, the sysadmin can set up an open standard print server, like lpd or CUPS, which can abstract away any printer as a common PostScript device of varying pixel and color resolution. That assumes that the sysadmin selected a printer which is compatible with an open-standard print server.

Here's my procedure for supporting proprietary clients from an open standard print server.

I typically buy a printer that's supported by Linux [cups.org], set up a Linux print server [cups.org], then export that via lpd [cups.org], Appletalk [sourceforge.net], and Samba [samba.org]. Then I install the standard Apple Laserwriter driver on any Windows clients, because it's simply a Postscript driver. In fact, you'll find that a lot of the entries in the Windows driver database are simply alternate names for or versions of the Apple Laserwriter driver because it's just Postscript. Then I install MacOS's standard Postscript lpr client on the MacOS client hosts.

Another time, I made Linux print to a totally proprietary printer. It was an HP 3150, which is an excellent value although proprietary; sometimes you take the hit and run with it. You can install an ethernet adapter from HP, on any parallel printer device of any kind. Then on the aforementioned print server, I installed VMware and Windows 98 with the proprietary drivers, which exported the printer to Samba, which reexported it as Postscript. That whole virtual machine was just another printer driver!

That's almost as crazy as writing an open source, open standard implementation of a reverse engineered Microsoft protocol based on their buggy specs and implementations. ;) But it's still a good idea to try to eventually directly support the alleged standards, to support the exceptional cases where a direct local client-side driver is necessary.

I am sure there are people who are unfortunate enough to have chosen very driver-specific proprietary devices for printing and imaging, but in most cases it was technicall preventable.

===

a question for Jeremy Allison (or anybody) (2)

Srin Tuar (147269) | about 13 years ago | (#284866)

I am running an older version of samba, where I have smbmnt suid root so that non root users can mount SMB shares.

The bug that bothers me most is when a windows box goes down (can you imagine that?) only root can unmount the share.

My question is whether this aspect of samba has been fixed. I have combed through all the online material and cant seem to find an answer to that.

RedHat 7.1 now out of date ;) (1)

jmeff (153160) | about 13 years ago | (#284875)

Wow, just a day after the release of RedHat 7.1, one of the most important server apps that's been in testing for over 2 years, and in development for even longer, is finally released as stable! Couldn't RedHat see this coming? What a lost opportunity, oh well. It seems many other things like Python 2.1, Postgres 7.1, and Gnome 1.4 aren't in RedHat's latest release either (gnome1.4 understandably missing).

Congratulations should also go to Luke Kenneth Caston Leighton who engineered most of the PDC-related code and who undoubtedly made samba 2.2 possible. Check out www.samba-tng.org [samba-tng.org] for more info on PDC development (TNG = the next generation).

Re:RedHat 7.1 now out of date ;) (1)

jmeff (153160) | about 13 years ago | (#284876)

Yes, but I'm talking about a few important packages, such as the kernel, samba, postgres, kde, etc., and samba 2.2 is a release that's been coming for over 2 years now. Redhat should have been testing the samba 2.2 alpha releases for some time now, and be ready to include them and support it (maybe they already are ready). There's a huge opportunity there to be the first distribution to provide a near replacement for an NT PDC (unless you need BDC's), and they could have done it if they'd managed to do the timing slightly differently. It'll now be another 4 months or more before RedHat gets 7.2 out and supports samba 2.2 out of the box. We don't even know if it'll be in RedHat 7.2, because redhat seems to only does minor updates between dist rev's (binary compatibility for sure, .conf file compatibility too?).

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

MrBogus (173033) | about 13 years ago | (#284879)

I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections

A file and print connection is just one thing that would require a CAL. (Essentially anything that uses Windows authentication requires a CAL.)

Who's bright idea was the CAL, anyway?

Microsoft's, although they probably noted that Novell customers were happily paying for seat licences. NT 3.1 didn't require CALs.

Still too hard (1)

jchristopher (198929) | about 13 years ago | (#284884)

Samba lets you access Linux shares from Windows, right?

I tried it under Mandrake, but it was impossible to setup for a clueless newbie.

Try again.

Re:Still too hard (1)

jchristopher (198929) | about 13 years ago | (#284885)

Thanks for making my point - why is it so hard?

Hint - "other OSs are hard too" is not an answer that will help nontechnical people use Linux.

Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (2)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | about 13 years ago | (#284886)

Look also for freetds. The latest version is supposed to support SQL2k, and we hope to be testing it soon against that. It's worked fine for SQL7 for the past 6 months here, and the author has been very helpful when we've needed it. :)

Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (1)

Telastyn (206146) | about 13 years ago | (#284887)

Quite true, though unless I'm mistaken Apache and Samba were developed 2-3 years before postgreSQL, I may be mistaken. If so accept my appologies.

Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (1)

Telastyn (206146) | about 13 years ago | (#284888)

Perhaps you misread... I said that samba on most platforms is much more stable than win9x, or NT4. win2k I would debate you depending on the *nix variant chosen, and the way samba was used.

Flamebait is a far better cry than being just as stupid as management that require companies to use windows clients.

Windows (2000) has it's benefits, especially compared to modern Linux. Modern linux has it's benefits over windows and more traditional unicies. Traditional unicies have benefits over windows and modern linux.

Linux zealots should pull their heads out of their asses and realise what a bad name they're creating for their beloved.

Unix vs. the Stupid (2)

Telastyn (206146) | about 13 years ago | (#284889)

I'd like to thank the Samba team for developing one of the two first "enterprise" useful tools for linux/unix (apache being the other). Their work has made it possible for Administrators who want the stability and functionality of unix while being hamstrung by technical incompetance at a managerial level.

"We need to support all these windows users."

"okay, let me setup this file server... yeah... windows..."

Re:Great Colors (OT) (1)

MCZapf (218870) | about 13 years ago | (#284890)

That's odd...I noticed the colors too. I was just thinking about how I like them better than the colors found on the rest of Slashdot. But, maybe I just noticed them because this whole section is new.

This feature list makes me very happy... (1)

kstumpf (218897) | about 13 years ago | (#284891)

I'm developing my company's Intranet on Linux. My web server cluster is literally a solitary island in a Microsoft-centric corporation. When given the goals for our Intranet, I hit alot of roadblocks due to the need to interface my Linux servers with the Windows network, mainly due to our recent migration to Win2K.

After looking over the feature list, this release will allow me to accomplish the things my superior's desire.

Samba is obviously a critical effort in increasing corporate acceptance of *nix in traditional Windows shops. My boss is really starting to like telling everyone how much money the company has saved by implementing our web efforts in a Linux environment. We're using less hardware, have superb uptime, and saving a fortune on software licenses.

Without Samba, my next project may have been written in VBScript. Not a pleasant thought.

Now if I can find a reliable interface to MS SQL2000, I'll be all set. :)

Re:This feature list makes me very happy... (1)

kstumpf (218897) | about 13 years ago | (#284892)

Sounds good. I'd heard this about SQL7, but was not sure if SQL2K would uphold it.

Re:Stupid question about netbios naming resolution (2)

helzerr (232770) | about 13 years ago | (#284895)

While I HATE WINS with a passion and wish it would be fully replaced by DNS everywhere... You may want to try this, which I found here: http://www.windowsitlibrary.com/Content/155/09/2.h tml#1 [windowsitlibrary.com]

There may be a way to do this via broadcast the same way Windows machines without WINS do, but I don't know it.

WINS Clients -- Unix and Unix-like Systems It's very easy to configure any computer running SAMBA as a WINS client, but recall from the server discussion that SAMBA can't be a WINS server and a WINS client at the same time. So, first ensure that the smb.conf file entry "wins support = yes" (which configures the SAMBA computer as a WINS server) is a comment (the default). Then edit the next line to read "wins server = www.xxx.yyy.zzz ," where www.xxx.yyy.zzz is the IP address of your WINS server. You don't have to reboot the Unix computer. SAMBA automatically reads the configuration file changes. To force the changes to take place immediately, rather than waiting for SAMBA to read the changes from the configuration file, you can stop and restart the SAMBA programs using the /etc/rc.d/init.d/smb stop and /etc/rc.d/init.d/smb start commands.

You will have to configure a WINS server on one of the Windows servers for this to work, and add the WINS server entry to your DHCP configuration.

Let's face it .. (2)

SirFlakey (237855) | about 13 years ago | (#284896)

Projects like Samba, OpenH323, 1/2 of Enlightenment and a fair few others are why I am still in Australia =) ..(yes I know it's a collaborative effort - just good to know we've got some very smart people doing cool things =) not just the "Why whoop your collective butts in sports and we're still all criminals mentality") =)
--

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

hammock (247755) | about 13 years ago | (#284898)

Businesses don't pirate Microsoft software if they value thier livelihood. See www.bsa.org for details.

Despite being a .org, the bsa makes a ton of profit-money for policing Microsoft software licences.


"Why didn't I join Microsoft? [LAUGHTER]"

Re:Point and click printing (1)

hammock (247755) | about 13 years ago | (#284899)

The downside is that your print server is still running Windows 98.

The upside is that it reboots in about 5 seconds under VMWare, which is something that happens quite often on the Windows 9x line.

"Why didn't I join Microsoft? [LAUGHTER]"

Re:"authentication source"? (4)

hammock (247755) | about 13 years ago | (#284900)

Does this version of Samba in essence emulate Microsoft's licensing agent, allowing free use of features that Microsoft wants you to pay for, or does this mean something else?
Sounds like something that could result in a tidal wave of lawsuits from Redmond.


Funny you should mention this situation. Are you familiar with Gateway Services for Netware included with Windows 2000 Server? What this allows you to do is set up a Novell server using IPX/SPX, connect a Win2k server to it with that service running, and an entire Win2k TCP/IP network of Windows clients can use the Novell server and only have to buy a single Netware license, since it's only using a single connection (the Win2k Server). Think of it as NAT for a Novell Server.

A tidal wave of lawsuits? I don't see any from Novell against Microsoft, why should Microsoft care if Samba beat them at thier own (dirty) game?

"Why didn't I join Microsoft? [LAUGHTER]"

Samba absolutely rules (3)

nate1138 (325593) | about 13 years ago | (#284910)

This has to be one of the coolest bits of software for *nix. Especially with the ability to act as a PDC, it allows an option of what server you want to use to manage your windows clients. I'll go where I damn well please today, thanks.

Re:Unix vs. the Stupid (1)

TheAwfulTruth (325623) | about 13 years ago | (#284911)

Sorry, this is pure flamebait. Anytime someone says anything negative about *nix or anything positive about windows the flamebait tag is pulled out and stamped on the post instantly, yet this type of thing gets high "Funny" or "Insightful" scores. Come on. /. could be 10 times the site it is today if this sort of thing wasn't so rampant. Flamebait is flamebait, mark it so. (Haha, go ahead and mark this reply as flamebait just to "get" me...)

Developers section? (1)

TheAwfulTruth (325623) | about 13 years ago | (#284912)

Why is the innagural post to the developers section about something that is not a developers tool or involved in the barest way with development? Wouldn't this make the entire article "Off Topic"? 8 minutes later is a post about a real development tool. Samba is a network tool. Are FTP and Web servers developer tools too according to /.? Just curious...

Re:Developers section? (1)

TheAwfulTruth (325623) | about 13 years ago | (#284913)

Okay, I'll reply to my own post. This is for "Developers" to come and advertise their own wares. My mistake. /. and Freshmeat are one. Move along, nothing to see here...

Re:"authentication source"? (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 13 years ago | (#284915)

I think 2k Server comes with 10, not 5. I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections you're allowed on 2k Pro and ME. Not that it matters much...

My question is what kind of affect, if any, this will have on Microsoft's Win 2k Sever Family sales. Having to bend over to pay for networking liscences (on top of server and workstation liscences) can't be all that popular among their customers.

Who's bright idea was the CAL, anyway?

Re:Still too hard (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 13 years ago | (#284916)

The same is true for setting up shares in Win 2k as a clueless newbie. Windows 9x simplifies things so that you're pretty much sharing an object with everybody, or not sharing at all. Sharing in 2k is a wee bit more complicated. It's tied in to the user log-ins, so when you share an object in 2k, you have to go about picking users or groups to have access, sifting through the 25 different access control options...

Samba is aimed at the "real" (client/server) networking crowd, and in that it seems to be doing quite well. I'd say Samba and Win 2k sharing are about the same difficulty to set up, with extra marks going to Samba for not making me go through one of those damned wizards... :)

Re:Still too hard (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 13 years ago | (#284917)

"Thanks for making my point - why is it so hard?"

Short answer: security/technical reasons. It's a limitation of the client/server model, not the OS.

The whole reason for having logins and passwords on your network is to be able to regulate access to resources. If you're going to share resources on such a network, then you're also going to have to regulate who has access to that resource.

In such an environment, setting up a share is always going to be a technical issue, not for the faint of heart. You're going to have to know who you want to share with and how much control you want them to have.

Trying to make Samba work more easily for the non-technical is like trying to design AutoCAD or Pro/Engineer for the non-drafter. There's a point where, if it needs to be THAT simplistic, you should consider using Paintbrush instead.

Re:Still too hard (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 13 years ago | (#284918)

"Setting up W2K shares is nothing more than a few mouse clicks"

Preparing to share is a different story. Win 2k is rigged to get you to use NTFS permissions exclusively to regulate access (Microsoft texts tell you to just give the Everybody group Full Control permissions).

Once you look at configuring NTFS permissions, you're faced with a monolithic list of access control options (especially if you click on the "advanced" button), many of which seemingly overlap ("Write" and "Modify?" "Read" and "List Folder Contents?"). While I don't have the network admin experience to be able to say whether NTFS or Linux's permission structure (user/group/other, read/write/execute) is better, I do know that chapters 14 and 15 ("Securing Network Resources with NTFS Permissions" and "Administering Shared Folders," respectively) of Microsoft's MCSE Training Kit -- Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional have a total "estimated lesson time" of just over 3 hours.

Re:Cost (3)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 13 years ago | (#284922)

"the skill and effort required to install and configure it is not."

... but still less than the corresponding costs of a Win 2k Server liscence (any flavor) and all the corresponding CALs. The larger your organization, the more CALs you'll need to buy to support Win 2k Server, and the more tempting it will be to use Samba instead.

Besides, installation of components in Linux is simpler than Windows (no rebooting), and the know-how needed to properly configure it will take an hour, maybe two to glean from the HOWTOs.

"You have to consider the cost of employing someone with the required skills"

... or you can be smart enough to hire someone who can learn the skills

Besides, the box of a Win 2k implementation might as well say "MCSE Not Included" right on it. At least with Linux you won't have to spend $1000's for the software on top of IT salaries

"Windows supports unattended installations"

... as do several Linux distros...

"provided the configuration settings are correctly specified."

Like I said, "MCSE Not Included."

Re:A fix to try (1)

EvilStein (414640) | about 13 years ago | (#284923)

How about we just upgrade to MacOS X Server instead?
Share the same sharepoints with Samba and Netatalk?
Use FTP? After all, it's Linux, so you've got an FTP server capable machine.
Transfer via HTTP.
Hell, install Carracho on something.. that works too. :P~
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...