[Samba] Printer sharing with 64-bit Windows clients

[Jeremy Allison]

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:44:22PM -0600, Daniel Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I have a problem accessing a CUPS/Samba shared printer on a Windows XP x64
> Professional system (WinNT5.2 kernel).  It seems from my searching that
> this is a problem affecting only 64-bit Windows clients, but perhaps not
> all 64-bit Windows clients.
> 
> See also:
>   https://bugs.launchpad.net/fedora/+bug/482836
>   http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8263192
> 
> I'm running Samba v3.4.5 on a 32-bit Slackware v13 virtual machine, Linux
> kernel v2.6.29.6.  CUPS is v1.3.11.  I have produced a log level 5 output
> showing two clients connecting to the Samba system and trying to view
> properties on the printer.  The 32-bit client "Manager2b" succeeds, the
> 64-bit client "MasterIm64VM" does not.  The logs (and config) are in
> http://thor.chguernsey.com/temp/samba3.4.5logs-0.tgz
>  (116kb, MD5SUM 04672e49116c4596820812db5cb8cdfb).

Ok, here's the deal. If you have 64-bit Windows clients at the
moment you need to be using 3.3.10, not anything later. If you're
using 32-bit Windows clients, you can use 3.4.5 or later.

The reason (and Guenther can correct me if I'm wrong), is
that in 3.4.x we changed from the hand-marshalled SPOOLSS RPC
we used in 3.3.x, which was mostly correct after being worked
on for many years, to pidl-generated SPOOLSS RPC directly from
the idl files. Now our idl files are correct, but it turns
out that the Windows idl parser for SPOOLSS is itself custom,
and won't accept the normally marshalled RPC packets that
the pidl-generated code creates.

Guenter and Metze have been doing a lot of work on fixing
this, and this is why 32-bit Windows clients work in 3.4.5.
However there are still some changes needed for 64-bit Windows
clients, and this will probably make it into an early patch
for 3.5.x (it won't make 3.5.0, as it's too late to test the
changes needed before we ship next month).

I'm going to write this up as a tech-note for the next
3.4.x release and for 3.5.0 and get it into the release
notes. Hope this hasn't caused you too many problems.

Jeremy.