MS "breaking" Samba

[Simo Sorce]

Gerald Carter wrote:
> 
> Long message notice.....
> 
> Simo Sorce wrote:
> >
> > > Paul Leach wrote:
> > >
> > > We have never added any improvements (or
> > > non-improvements) to the protocols in order to
> > > "break" Samba (or to affect it in any way at
> > > all).  We tested Win2k against Samba as a file
> > > server to make sure that it continued to work
> > > as a "down-level" server, along with NT4,
> > > OS/2, Windows 9x, and others. Of course, it (just
> > > like NT4) would not support the new Windows
> > > 2000 features, by which we hope to entice our
> > > customers to upgrade by providing new value to them.
> > >
> > > Just to be clear: we didn't test Win2k against Samba as
> > > a DC; we did test against NT4 DCs, however, so if
> > > Samba really does emulate all NT4 DC functionality,
> > > it should have been OK.
> > >
> > > Paul
> 
> Hi Paul.  Haven't head a peep from you in a while.  Hope
> things are well.  Just though I would inject that first.
> 
> > I'm not a Samba team member, but as I remember Samba
> > needed to upgrade from 2.0.6 to 2.0.7 just to serve files
> > to Win2k machines, so your claim that you tested Win
> > 2000 against Samba to ensure compatibility as file
> > server must be false!
> >
> > DC functionality was not supported so testing against it
> > was obviously not required, anyway win2k does not
> > function with samba 2.0.x in NT4 compatibility mode(how
> > much compatible is then??)
> >
> > I hate to see this kind of statements from employee of
> > a company that is proven to have made unfair practices, I
> > think that if you care your personal reputation you
> > should check twice and prove your statements before speaking.
> 
> Simo,  Antagonism doesn't help.  :-)    MS did clean
> up many things in Win2k.  Perhaps the complaint is that
> all the changes were not documented. (hey paul ;) )
> 
> So i will make another plea.  (quoting from a previous
> request by Luke).  Any (or all) of the information
> would be a good thing.
> 
>         i will move this off list after the
>         initial request in case you would like
>         to discuss this further
> 
> .....begin plea.........................


I've not said they have broken things or they have not cleened up the
code, I said they cannot claim to have tested win2k against samba for
compatibility as as far I remember (am I correct) samba < 2.0.7 will not
be able to serve file to win2k and 2.0.7 come out after win2k also to
resolve this problem.
Am I wrong?

-- 
Simo Sorce - Integrazione Sistemi Unix/Windows - Politecnico di Milano
E-mail: simo.sorce at polimi.it
Tel.int: 02 2399 2425 - Fax.int. 02 2399 2451
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Be happy, use Linux!