[Samba] SCO OpenServer
rowlandpenny at googlemail.com
Sat May 23 09:46:53 MDT 2015
On 23/05/15 16:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 8:31 AM, L.P.H. van Belle <belle at bazuin.nl> wrote:
>> If you upgrade to sco 5.0.7, you get samba 3.0.20
>> 5.0.6 had samba 3.0.14. so im wondering why your using samba 2.2..
>> samba 3.0x. is on the supplimental discs.
> Been there, done that. Samba 2.2 was built into the base release,
> supplements weren't always stable or well supported.
> OpenServer 5.0.7, the final release before the disastrous and overall
> incompatible upgrade to version 6, was released over 12 years ago. I
> took a look some years ago at upgrading OpenServer 5 release systems
> to OpenServer 6, and I couldn't keep any of the relevant in house
> software working *anyway*, and it was really expensive. It made better
> sense to move away from a vendor that was in legal and fiscal and
> technological ruin. (Check the old www.groklaw.net archives, it was a
> fascinating destruction of a previously robust company and
> So it was much easier to simply upgrade to an RHEL release and migrate
> the in house software, and keep an old OpenServer system or two alive
> as needed to ensure access to old data by running virtual machine on
> VMware. VMware works well with 5.0.7, or you can find my old notes on
> Google about how to virtualize some of the older releases.
> You can, in theory, try to build up the tool chain from Skunkware
> published tools at ftp://ftp2.sco.com/pub/skunkware/osr5 to get a more
> recent Samba version, but I don't recommend it. I went through that
> for OpenSSH, and it was really non-pretty. Rather, if possible, I'd
> look at using a more modern Linux or possibly OpenBSD as a Samba
> server, if needed, and use any remaining OpenServer hosts only as
> clients, preferably as NFS clients since that is better supported by
Hi, I worked for a company that used SCO 5.0.x (not sure which version)
on a server to run a program called 'gold'. Yes it came with samba 2.2
and it worked up to a point, but it would have been better to upgrade
samba, but I was advised not to try, as that way lay nothing but pain.
The company then upgraded the version of 'gold' and this required a new
server which now came with SLES, a much better OS. It may be that the
legacy programs the OP is using, may have later versions that will run
on Linux. Another thing to think about, just how secure is a program
that is over 12 years old ?
More information about the samba