NT5rc2 -> Samba PDC

[ekuiperba at cc.curtin.edu.au]

On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

> jeremy, i _do_ want to punish / discourage people from using 2.0.X as a
> PDC!  the MSRPC services are old and ugly; the NT to unix mapping system
> nails us to some smb.conf parameters i just threw in to loadparm.c so i
> could get things working.
> 
> i would be very surprised if NT5rc2 can actually talk to 2.0.X MSRPC
> services.  NT5rc2 is far more robust and picky about the marshalled data
> it will accept (a Good Thing :)
> 
> in the end, the patch to fix this damn stuff was modifications to two
> lines.  it's therefore pretty simple job to put or not put this in, with
> the benefit that if you don't put it in, people won't be able to use NT5
> with 2.0.X as a PDC.
> 
> i don't care if you like it, people: don't do it!!!  you'll end up with
> headaches later, trying to move to 2.1.X!

It is all and good telling us to move to 2.1.X, but it is no good unless
2.1.X is released and usable. I use 2.0.X as PDC for the moment because
it is stable and there is no 2.1.X too speak of (no CVS doesn't cut it on
production servers)

Sorryu for my useless rant. I would just like it if 2.1.X could finally
get out of the door, since 2.0.X really sucks as a PDC. Keep up the good
work samba team.

Beau Kuiper
ekuiperba at cc.curtin.edu.au

> 
> 
> gerald, the defining answer... i had one ten minutes ago :)
> 
> <a href="mailto:lkcl at samba.org"   > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton    </a>
> <a href="http://www.cb1.com/~lkcl"> Samba and Network Development   </a>
> <a href="http://samba.org"        > Samba Web site                  </a>
> <a href="http://www.iss.net"      > Internet Security Systems, Inc. </a>
> 
>