[Samba] Samba 3.0.7, WinXP Pro SP2 printing issues with netbiosnames.

[Alex de Vaal]

> We're currently experiencing some problems that wasn't a problem in 3.0.4.
> Since SP2 was installed printers get connected
\\<ipaddress>\<printer-name>
> instead of \\<netbios-name>\<printer-name>. It's more common on SP2
> machines but it happens on non-SP2 machines.
 
> Although these issues are not consistent.
 
> Which some windows applications seems to have a problem with.
> (Citrix-stuff etc.)
 
> With 3.0.4 printers get connected as \\<netbios-name>\<printer-name>
> regardless of SP2 or not.
> As a result were having problems pinpointing the problem wheter it's SP2
> or Samba 3.0.7.
 
> So is there anyone else experiencing this and/or know of a workaround ?

Hello Erik,
 
I'm experiencing the same problem as you have with 3.0.7 on XP SP1 clients,
downgrading to 3.0.4 solves this problem.
 
Look at the mail I posted here about this:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-September/092848.html
 
I don't dare to use 3.0.7 on my production sites at this time, because my
clients get their printers installed via the ADS logon script. Because of
this behavior in 3.0.7 the clients get the printers double installed; the
\\<netbios-name>\<printer-name> printer (which is already in the profile of
the user) and the \\<ipaddress>\<printer-name> printer (which is actually
the same printer). New profiles at the clients get only the
\\<ipaddress>\<printer-name> printer installed.
A lot of scripts on our ADS servers use the \\<netbios-name>\<printer-name>
naming convention and I don't want to change the scripts at this time,
because the problem seems to be fixed in 3.0.8; look at this mail:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-September/091804.html

-- 
Regards, 

Alex de Vaal. 


Visit our Web site: http://www.nh-hotels.com
This message is from NH HOTELES and it is private and confidential.
Its content may be legally protected.Reception by a non-intended person does not waive legal protection rights.
If you receive this message by mistake, please delete it from your system and report the sender.
Although this message has been cleared for viruses using currently available virus definitions before sending,
it is the responsibility of the receiver to ensure it is virus-free.Thank you.