Q about cvs vs. samba2.0.0b4

Samba-Support samba at aquasoft.com.au
Sun Dec 27 02:58:39 GMT 1998

My advice in this instance is to go with the current CVS tree for the
Samba-2.0.0 branch. My reason is simple, we heve not yet issued a Beta
with the most recent fixes in it and are unlikely to do this as I believe
we are very near release.

The Samba-2.1.0 developmental branch is not yet ready for prime-time
testing. Samba-2.1.0 code is found under the default location (or head
branch). Please be careful when downloading CVS code that you do specify
SAMBA_2_0 as the branch tag.

Thos who wish to test the Domain Control code should work with the 2.1.0
code and not the 2.0.0 code - but please realise that 2.1.0 is not as
mature as the 2.0.0 code tree.

As to the differences between Beta4 and 2.0.0 CVS code:
There is a bug in nmbd in Beta4 that can cause memory depletion and
subsequent exposure of the system. This is fixed in the current CVS code.
Apparently this bug had been there for some time. I am running beta4 at a
number of sites, yet only one site was bitten by this bug that has been
closed out. This importance of wide-spread pre-release testing and stress
testing can not be over-emphasised.

Over all, 2.0.0 is looking good so do expect to hear a release
announcement during January. We would like to see some more feedback for
platform compilation support to make sure we can compile on as many
platforms as possible.

John H Terpstra - Samba-Team

On Sun, 27 Dec 1998, Colovic Igor wrote:

> My question is simple.
> Is it better to use cvs code or samba2.0.0b4 from www.samba.org , and what
> are differences.
> Please if you can answer quickly.
> ______________________________________________
> Colovic Igor                Linux Users Group of Yugoslavia
> www.linux.org.yu
> cigor at eunet.yu
> DelphiPro at yahoo.com

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list