[Samba] taking the 3.0 plunge

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Sun, 2002-11-10 at 12:43, Barry Hunter Priest wrote:
> I'm just curious:  It seems that more and more people are using 3.0 (or 
> 3.0a20). Obviously on this list we normally hear the worst (ie xxx 
> doesn't work, why?).  What I would like to know about are 3.0 success 
> stories.  Stability? Platform? Compiler? Gotcha's encountered?
> 
> Here is what I am considering: a Mandrake 9.0 box with it's default gcc 
> 3.2,  I am still using a windows 2K Advanced Server to do AD stuff but 
> would eventually like to migrate that to the linux box as well.

Well, firstly grab 3.0 from CVS.  Things have got a *lot* better in the
last few weeks, and 3.0 is now tracking HEAD pretty well on the stuff
that matters.

On moving from Win2k to Samba, we are working getting the 'Vampire'
stuff going for that, but we will only be an NT4 level DC for some time
yet.  (Assistance in moving us to Win2k level always appreciated :-)

However, as a member server we are pretty solid.  This stuff is used in
production NAS appliances, so has actually had a very solid going over
by some very professional QA folk.  

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                 abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team  abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College   abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org     http://build.samba.org     http://hawkerc.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20021110/46ab87a6/attachment.bin