[Samba] which version best to use right now?

[Gaiseric Vandal]

But it looks like Samba 3.0.x is not going to support Windows 7?




On 11/04/09 17:59, Andrew Masterson wrote:
>> From: samba-bounces at lists.samba.org
>>      
> [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org]
>    
>> On Behalf Of Philip Brown
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 1:41 PM
>> To: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Subject: [Samba] which version best to use right now?
>>
>> hiya folks,
>> I've been trying to figure out which branch of samba is best for us to
>>      
> use.
>    
>> I read the FAQ, and it seems a little out of date. or at best, lacking
>>      
> in info.
>    
>> It says that, "The current stable, production Samba server is the
>>      
> Samba 3.2
>    
>> branch."
>>
>> If that is the case.. then why are there **THREE** other branches?
>>
>> why is there also a 3.3, *and* a 3.4, *and* a 4.x branch?
>>
>> To give an idea of my criteria: I'm looking for a version that will be
>>      
> part
>    
>> of a large-scale server for the next few years, as a member of an
>>      
> ms-windows
>    
>> active directory
>>
>>      
> What OS are you using?  If you're using something like RHEL or SUSE I
> would go with the vendor-packaged kit and forget any of the bleeding
> edge stuff.  Red Hat is still on 3.0.33, but they seem to keep it more
> up to date that a generic 3.0.33 release, and I would go with that - it
> performs just fine and should have all the functionality you need.
> (unless you end up in a strange AD environment that you need more
> current AD support, but I severely doubt it)
>
> -=Andrew
>