NTDOM: Bug report clarification

jeremy garber jgarber at eng.utoledo.edu
Fri Feb 6 20:23:14 GMT 1998

> jeremy garber wrote:
> > 
> > I downloaded the latest (I think) BRANCH_NTDOM code on Wednesday
> > (02/04/1998). I had to make several changes to the Makefile to get it to
> > complete. Solaris 2.5.1.
> > 
> > Should I report those fixes on this list or submit them to samba-bugs?
> > 
> Are you referring to the addition of smbgetpass.o to smbd and nmbd
> linking?  That was the only one I had to chnage for a clean compile (
> under Solaris 2.5.1 of course ).
> In answer to your question, I belive that they should be reported to
> samba-bugs with the Subject beginning with NTDOM: 
> j-
> -- 
> ________________________________________________________________________
>                             Gerald ( Jerry ) Carter	
> Engineering Network Services                           Auburn University 
> jerry at eng.auburn.edu             http://www.eng.auburn.edu/users/cartegw
>        "...a hundred billion castaways looking for a home."
>                                   - Sting "Message in a Bottle" ( 1979 )

Yes, I added smbgetpass.o to the definition of UTILOBJ.  Probably not the best 
place to put it, but it worked.  Yes, I haven't had a great deal of exposure to 

Also had to add the definition of ARCFOUR_OBJ.  Shouldn't there at least be a 
comment and stub for us to fill in?

I'm not complaining... just trying to help out.

Luke did respond privately that samba-bugs is appropriate.


More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list