Anyone resolved "failed to lock SMB passwd file"?

[Anthony Ord]

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:51:14 +1100, "Robert Dahlem"
<Robert.Dahlem at frankfurt.netsurf.de> wrote:

>People,
>
>On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:03:56 +1100, Robert Dahlem wrote:
>
>>This seems to be some long standing bug since "update encrypted" came up:
>> [...]
>
>>Perhaps someone has a bit of spare time to proove this and report to samba-bugs.
>>I feel discouraged to do so because I reported several problems and never got 
>>something back but the machine generated reply to be patient ...
>
>I Just want to tell people here that after complaining about the samba team being 
>unresponsive to mails adressed to the the samba-bugs list I'm a bit ashamed:
>
>John from the samba team stated they are working with a dozen of volunteers on 
>those mailings and they have already answered 8,000 of about 11,000 messages until 
>yet.

I feel that lack of communication is a problem. If a known bug (that's
bug, not configuration problem) comes up in this mailing list, then it
should be acknowledged as known/fixed by one of the samba team the
*FIRST* time it comes up. The rest of the members of the mailing list
can respond any time after that.

This will help avoid people being discouraged because they think no
one is listening.

Obviously members of the samba team should not spend time responding
to "I just put SP3 into NT4 and now I can't log in..." or "I just
upgraded to Win98 and now I can't log in..."

Another thing, the reply-to line should be changed to the mailing
list. As it stands, if someone has a problem and you reply to it, by
default only that person receives the answer. The mailing list as a
whole do not. I have lost count of the number of time people have said
"I have looked at the archives, and have found many people with this
problem, but with no answers." Simple. The answer never made it to the
mailing list, so it didn't make it to the archive. If you take an
objective look at this mailing list, it looks like lots of people are
complaining about problems, that no one knows how to solve. This is
obviously not true!

I appreciate, that answers coming to this mailing list will increase
the traffic, but that will only be over the short term. Those people
who check the archives will not be as prevalent, and repeat questions
will be reduced. If need be, perhaps a new mailing list called
"samba-answers" should be set up, and the "Reply-To:" line set to
that.

Comments? 

(But remember to change your "To:" to point to the mailing list... ;-)

>Gerald from the samba team stated that one-half of these peoble are primarily 
>developers working on the "golden" code.
>
>Jeremy from the samba team stated that the bug mentioned in the subject field is 
>already known and yet fixed in the code being released as 2.0.
>
>
>Sorry boys for being impatient and without respect. I read about 2,500,000 systems 
>running samba and using code no single person payed a penny for. You do not 
>deserve my above quoted statement.
>
>
>Hasta la vista,
>               Robert
Regards

Anthony
===============================================================
|'All kids love log!'                                         |
|                                              Ren & Stimpy   |
===============================================================