Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Samba Wins eWeek & PC Magazine Award 177

Posted by timothy from the infrastruction-and-stiflement dept.
frankie_guasch writes: "The award is "Innovation in Infrastructure" (i3) award for best Enterprise Software! And we beat out Sun Microsystems Java 2 Platform Standard Edition Version 1.4 and Bea Systems WebLogic Server 7.0 for the award, so I'm stunned that we won. These guys have marketing departments and a *budget.*" It's a strange contrast to the kind of attention that Samba is getting from Microsoft. (See these earlier posts for more on the CIFS situation.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samba Wins eWeek & PC Magazine Award More

Samba Wins eWeek & PC Magazine Award

Comments Filter:

  • Samba (Score:1, Interesting)

    by kwishot ( 453761 )
    Samba rocks.
    If only it wasn't so hard to configure shares... then again, maybe I'm just dumb, but it takes a lot of effort to set that stuff up.
    fp

    • Re:Samba (Score:3, Interesting)

      by InnereNacht ( 529021 )
      I remember trying to configure samba about 3 years ago when I first started working with linux... Most of my pain was caused by trying to work with the shares as well.

      Nowadays theres so many howto's out, though. They made it a ton easier to get things done. Hell, I think you can even configure shares with SWAT now too which simplifies it even more.

      Kudos to the Samba team for a job well done!
      • Yes but it shouldn't require reading How-to's and FAQ's. It should be no harder than networking using native ms windows.

        And does anyone know what ever happened to the explorer-like network/file browser that Corel Linux had? I remember trying Corel for a while and setting up SMB shares and connecting to them on ms window boxes was painless. Was that code kept proprietary by Corel? Who owns it now?

    • Re:Samba (Score:2, Interesting)

      by DarkRabbit ( 27941 )
      Samba has a web front-end that makes it all very easy! Just connect to http://localhost:901!
      • Tell me more about this - I've got samba running running under Debian/Woody on Sparc but haven't noticed anything about a web interface.

    • Re:Samba (Score:2, Interesting)

      by silicon_synapse ( 145470 )
      Has anyone tried sharity? (http://www.obdev.at/products/sharity/index.html [obdev.at])? I got a license for it a while back but haven't gotten around to trying it.
    • It is a little tricky. There are definitely harder things to do right (as opposed to say, Sendmail, which is probably being the canonical example of Hard To Configure Correctly), but it could be a lot easier.

      Yeah, I know there are tools out there, like the Ximian Setup Tools, and SWAT, but I don't think they cut it all the way. I like getting a listing of all my shares in one place, ala XST and SWAT, but just to add shares needs to be as simple as Windows makes it. I should be able to add shared folders to the network just by right-clicking the folder's icon in Nautilus (or in Konq, if that's your flavor). I know I've seen this brought up for Nautilus in the past, so after GNOME 2 ships, hopefully this will get added. Any KDE users know if Konq has plans to do this?

      <flamebait>
      Nautilus 2 has beaten it's big gripe - it's finally quite speedy - when's Konq gonna simplify that button encrusted, "mystery-meat"-toolbar-icon-laden interface, eh? ;)
      </flamebait>
      • Both nautilus and konqueror already support this in Mandrake 8.2 if you enable users to be able to share their directories -

        Do you want to allow users to export some directories in their home?
        Allowing this will permit users to simply click on "Share" in konqueror and nautilus.

    • Re:Samba (Score:1, Troll)

      by lemonchiffon ( 558897 )
      um, hi...if you don't want to deal with granular configuration you should probably be using a W2k box....
    • Try Webmin (www.webmin.com). Its Samba module is Windows-simplicity itself. Plus you get the nice granularity of linux! :)

    • Re:Samba (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RevAaron ( 125240 )
      Christ. Are some moderators that jerky that they mark a guy as flamebait because he thinks it's difficult? Man, that's sad. And lame. But then again, this is Slashdot!

  • Errr...so where's the announcement? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by emag ( 4640 ) <slashdot@gurskiNETBSD.org minus bsd> on Thursday May 09, 2002 @01:57PM (#3492285) Homepage
    The linked eWeek article only mentions that Samba's a finalist, and that the winners will be announced May 7. Since it's past that date, where's a link to the actual winners list? Not that I'm doubting that Samba could easily beat out the others, but I need to rub someone's nose in the fact that Samba won.
  • modularize Samba (it might be already, Ihave not looked) then make a module for supporting the CIFS and BSDL it. then add it to your GPL project.

    • modularize Samba (it might be already, Ihave not looked) then make a module for supporting the CIFS and BSDL it. then add it to your GPL project.

      You have to understand, the Samba developers cannot _look_ at the MS specs at all. They can not look at code created from the MS specs.

      Have no fear, the MS extensions can be reverse engineered. Just give the Samba team a little time and all will be well.
  • I mean, come on. "The Lion King" was release what, seven years ago? Too bad The "Lion King II: Samba's Pride" went straight to video.

  • Samba is awesome (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TuxLuvr ( 578149 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:02PM (#3492327) Homepage
    When trying to explain the Open Source philosophy to my wife, I used Samba as an example: I set up a file server for her office running Samba on FreeBSD 4.5.

    When I showed her the bill for hardware and software, I pointed out that the reason she now has a blazing fast server with great hardware, under budget, is that I opted not to install Windows 2000 Server.

    "So how can my Windows 2000 laptop running QuickBooks connect so seamlessly and without any crashes ever" (ok ok i'm paraphrasing..) she inquired.

    I proceeded to explain the magic of Samba, and the development model which made it possible....

    Thanks for great software! : - )

    • ... When I showed her the bill for hardware and software, ...

      You bill your wife for hardware and software?

    • One thing to be careful with WRT running Quickbooks over a samba share is to make sure that you don't upgrade/restart samba while someone is running Quickbooks over the network. Quickbooks is VERY touchy about this and will end up crashing if this happens.

      Of course, it sounds like in your case you just set it up and let it be, but this is more for others who are considering a similar setup.
      • That is because like most software running windows they still use DOS programming techniques. I wouldn't trust quicken software as far as you could throw it because it keeps transactions in memory and if the files go away, well so does your data.
        • What else would you expect other than "if the files go away, so does your data?" You seem to criticize Quicken for keeping records in both memory and files. How else is there to do it? If I delete a Gnumeric spreadsheet file, the data is gone. How else would you have it?
      • Actually I think that was one of the nifty bug fixes in 2.2.4 (which I just upgraded a few servers to)

    • Re:Samba is awesome (Score:5, Funny)

      by hij ( 552932 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:24PM (#3492456) Homepage
      That's weird. I did the same thing, but when I was done my wife only asked about the other things on the "to do" list.

      • That's weird. I did the same thing, but when I was done my wife only asked about the other things on the "to do" list.

        No, you're weird - and lucky, too!

        My wife doesn't wait for me to be done with some task before she asks me about the other things on the "to do" list.

    • Samba is unprofessional, just like Linux itself! (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Seen on comp.risks, please tell the guy what an idiot he is. Or if you happen to live nearby, you may try to give him a third meaning of killall, hehe...:

      Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:52:30 -0500
      From: dmaziuk@yola.bmrb.wisc.edu (Dimitri Maziuk)
      Subject: GNU in Not Unix (Re: Markettos, RISKS-22.05)

      Well, that particular risk is well known to professional Unix systems
      administrators -- in fact, I was rather surprised to see that Linux
      "killall" made the RISKS now: it's been [in]famous among Unix sysadmins for
      quite a while now.

      I see two issues here: one is that of false advertising, and another one --
      of professionalism (not that they are entirely unrelated).

      Stallman's rants about "LiGNUx" have a perfectly good technical reason
      behind them: "Linux" (as in "OS based on Linux kernel and free software")
      has lots of GNU software in it, and "GNU is Not Unix". Hence, Linux is
      Not Unix, regardless of what Linux advocates may be telling us, it is
      "GNU". (And, BTW, Unix is Not GNU.)

      That was about false advertising, now let's look at professionalism.

      Linux killall is perfect illustration of what happens when a product is
      designed by a diletante.

      Back in 1975 professionals designed an OS called Unix. Being professionals,
      they realised the need for certain design principles. Such as splitting a
      task into a number of smaller subtasks and designing a separate tool to
      handle each subtask (that does one thing, and does it well)[0].

      For example, shutting down a computer involves flushing (synchronizing) file
      buffers to disk ("sync"), killing all running processes ("killall"), and
      powering off the machine ("poweroff", at least on Solaris). All perfectly
      neat and logical.

      Along comes a layman who is unaware of the above principle, nor of
      the significant "prior art"[1]. Result? -- read Theo's message.

      (Various observations to show that isn't such a big problem (in
      no particular order):

      * professionals already know that similarly-named utilities often
      behave differently on different operating systems,
      * GNU folks never intended to uphold the aforementioned design
      principle in the first place (see EMACS), so no surprises there,
      after all, you'll only run "killall" on a Unix once.)

      We have a bigger problem with another Unix principle: source code
      portability.

      As software becomes more complex, it requires more sophisticated build
      tools. More and more open source software is being developed using GNU
      compilers and build tools, and it is becoming dependant on them. The result?
      -- While portability at the level of each compilation unit is still
      maintained, the whole thing is not portable anymore. It fails to build on
      non-GNU systems[2].

      GNU project in particular did a great service to software community by
      promoting and popularizing free software. It also did a great disservice by
      turning the whole thing into a political issue, and pretty much ignoring the
      need for competence and expertise on the part of software developers.
      Instead of sound software engineering, we now have "Free Speech"
      flag-waving[3].

      With more companies (individuals, governments) jumping on Linux bandwagon,
      the situation becomes eerily reminiscent of the recent dot-com boom; back
      then we had The Internet and e-words, now we have Open Source and
      Linux. Back then a few cautionary voices drowned in marketing hype, now
      they're likely to be branded Paid Advocates of Evil Entertainment Industry
      and Oppressors of Free Speech[tm] -- so they shut up and go learn Plan9, or
      something.

      (BTW, if it sounds like I'm singling GNU out, I'm not. Microsoft
      et al., did at least as much as GNU to get us where we are now.
      The whole thing would be very different if there was e.g. a
      liability clause in every software license.)

      But the $15 question remains: would you board an airplane designed by, say,
      2nd year biology student as a night-time hobby? So what makes you think
      their software design skills are any better?

      Hmm. This came out sounding like a rant. Well, it probably is.

      Dima

      [0] Various aspects of the problems related to complex software systems are
      very familiar to RISKS readers. They come up in, what? -- every other RISKS
      issue? 25+ years ago Unix authors were well aware of them, too.

      [1] Irix and Solaris "killall", for examle, behave like HP-UX one -- not
      surprising, considering the "grand scheme of things" outlined above.

      [2] Anyone who ever tried building open source software on Solaris using
      native build tools knows that 9 times out 10 GNU "libtool" fails to link
      shared libraries. The remaining 1 time GNU ./configure script fails to
      determine compiler flags to make position-independent code (needed for said
      libraries). And since GNU compiler and build tools are unable to produce
      64-bit code on Solaris, the libraries, and all software that uses them must
      be built as 32-bit binaries. Now, why did I pay for that 64-bit hardware,
      again?

      [3] And instead of one Shakespeare, we have a zillion monkeys with C
      compilers. As history of Usenet shows, we shouldn't expect them to come up
      with even "Hello World" anytime soon, not to mention "Hamlet".
  • Makes sense to me. Samba lets you use Windows and Linux, making each machine act like it's talking to a peer, instead of something else that's different to learn. That's one of the most useful things I can think of. It works very well on our network. This is from a users point of view, I know admins are a different story, but, admins are the minority anyway!
  • I don't think anybody can seriously say these days "open source can't innovate". It's winning awards for it!

    But seriously, if anyone ever says to you "well open source just copies the corporates" point to projects like the Linux virtual server project, or Tux, or Beowulf. Now Linux has achieved, then exceeded state of the art in the server arena, I wonder how soon it'll be before we see the same in the desktop market.

    • Samba is hardly an innovation. I'm sorry to say it, but MSFT were the innovators here. Samba is an attempt at reproduction with clearly defined requirements under a different environment.
      • Actually, MS didn't 'innovate' this protocol either. SMB/CIFS (LanMAN) were around before MS ever decided to 'innovate' them.

        -Ben
        • I stand corrected. Where did it come from then?

          • I attended a lecture by Steve French of IBM/Samba where this was explained from his slides. The following is part of his explanation:

            • People think of Microsoft when they think of CIFS since they coined the new name for the SMB protocol in 1996, soon after Sun announced the WebNFS extensions to NFSv3.
            • But Dr. Barry Feigenbaum (IBM) actually invented CIFS's predecessor SMB (originally called "BAF" protocol) in the mid-1980s and multiple companies contributed.
            • SMB is the X/Open (Open Group) "Standard for PC Interworking" (1992)
            • SMB/CIFS is the main network filesystem on OS/400, OS/2, DOS and other operating systems and implementations are available on most every major operating system for the past 10 years.
            • Storage Network Industry Association just released CIFS Technical Ref.
            • Unix and Macintosh extensions to CIFS are documented by SNIA and implemented

            You can (possibly ;P) see his lecture notes here [utexas.edu]. Warning: powerpoint slides.

            • But if Microsoft didn't create the SMB/CIFS protocol, is it then legal for them to put some sort of agreement that there can't be any GPL versions of the software?

              I don't know if this makes sense, i don't know the full story, but just a thought.

      • if by 'clearly defined' you mean 'completely fucked up', then yes, i agree.
    • Heh. Samba isn't an innovation. It is a typical case of "open source just copies the corporates." If it wasn't for "the corporates," there wouldn't be a need for Samba. Why would people be so hot about SMB compatibility if it weren't for MS's huge install base? They wouldn't be.

      As far as the Linux Virtual Server Project and Beowulf, sorry to rain on your parade, but clustering was around for a long time before that. They're awesome projects, that bring clustering to us for free, but they do do anything that's really new.

      We'll likely never see the same in the desktop market. Anything truly new innovative is usually dismissed, because it is different than the status quo. Joe Sixpack end-users don't want innovative, they want what they're used to. Which is why KDE and GNOME aim to be like Windows and to a lesser extent Mac OS. Again, this isn't a slam on them per se, they make Unix more accessible for a lot of people, but they are largely copies of old ideas. And that's fine. Because they make the old ideas Free and accessible, which is a good thing.

      There are already innovative things out there, like Squeak and Self which use the Morphic GUI framework. Most people, especially most "open source" developers, dismiss it, because it's not like everything else they've used before it.
      • If it wasn't for "the corporates," there wouldn't be a need for Samba

        Nor would there be computers. Or much of the industrialized world.

        Why would people be so hot about SMB compatibility if it weren't for MS's huge install base?

        You miss the point.

        If there wasn't SMB, there would be something else. Maybe it would be NFS. But file and print sharing are needed well beyond the "corporate" arena. Just look at how many people use it at home for file and print sharing between computers.

        The nifty thing here is that Samba does it across platforms with relatively easy setup. And it does it cheaper, faster, and better than the company that invented (and continues to maintain) the thing. Which is a pretty sad statement.
        • > Nor would there be computers. Or much of the
          > industrialized world.

          To an extent. The acedemic world came up with a large amount of the 'innovations' we use today. What else do you expect? Open software developers can innovate, certainly, but for the most part they choose to copy. No one can know what the world would be like with no corporations.

          I don't miss the point, I think you do. I think you confuse the issue, and take "not innovative" to mean "crappy." A lot of people make that mistake, so it's not a big deal. That's not the case.

          It doesn't matter if it's SMB, NFS, or anything else. An open source implementation of a standard created or propagated by some business isn't innovative. It's practical and cool, but it's nothing new.

          Again, just because it's not innovative it doesn't mean it's not useful. Millions of people could use Samba- but what does that have to do with how innovative it is?

          The post to which I replied was praising Samba as an example of how it doesn't just copy existing software/protocols, but that it innovates. Samba is not an example of this. It's a great example of software that works (and works better in many cases than the older commercial versions). That's important. Just because Samba does slightly better what someone else invented, it sure doesn't mean it's innovative.
      • You're missing the point, and in another way, totally wrong. You say that Samba copies "the corporates," but I'd like to know what corporation wrong software that lets Windows and Linux, HPUX, Solaris, IRIX, and more all communicate together as easily as they can with samba.

        As to your other dismissals, you're missing the point. You don't understand the difference between the *appearance* of innovation and actual innovation. If I built a car that looks exactly like say, a Dodge Neon, but put in a fusion engine to power it indefinitely with no fuel, you wouldn't call that an innovation because, functionally, it's the same thing as a combusion-powered car.

        Something to think about...
        • I'd love to think about it, but you didn't back yourself up. What do LVS Project or Beowulf do that's fundamentally different? What sets them apart other than that they're free? There would be something quite a bit different about a Neon with a fusion engine, indeed. But Kia making an $7000 SUV that uses the same ideas as a GMC SUV isn't an innovation, it's just cheaper.
          • What do they do that's fundamentally different? Almost everthing. I'm not going to list any because in your argument, you don't go into detail about how say, Beowulf is different from other clusters that have been around years. Any search for Beowulf technology on say, google will reveal hundreds of new features and methodologies employed.

            In short, your approach, to dismiss these projects as simply derivative, is antagonistic, pesimistic, and ignorant. You're obviously not a computer scientist.

            • Heh. I think the problem is that I'm a pragmatic computer scientist rather than a businessman or someone who mans the help desk. I don't throw around words like 'innovative' when they're not deserved. However, since it's easily forgotten around here, just because a project isn't innovative, it doesn't mean that it's bad, not useful, or an unneeded copy of someone else's work.

              Admittedly, my area of study (or personal interest) isn't clustering, but if you're an expert, what are some things that Beowulf *does* do fundamentally different? The "just go check google" excuse is cop-out.

              No, I don't dismiss them as 'simply derivative." That's your spin on it. They recycle old ideas, but do so in a way that makes them more accessible for more people. That's very commendable, but hardly innovative. I admit that my words have been antagonistic with people that cannot distinguish "innovative" and "good," or "not innovative" and "worthless."

              Being emotional and knee-jerk about it doesn't change my opinion, or the facts. I'm sorry that you feel that my not praising something for what it is not is a crime, but I think that praising such projects for their actual strengths is far better.
              • I'm not supproting my argument because you're not supporting yours; never once did you use any specific claims, ie sections of code, philosophy, or even the protol used for these technologies.

                Anyways you're dead set that just because they use a MS protocol it doesn't deserve praise, and this is where I disagree. Again I say, it's completely innovative because they built it themselves, and made it cross platform; something that has never been done before.
                • Again, you're having a problem figuring out that just because something isn't innovative, it doesn't mean that it's worthless. Samba is definitely a worthwhile recipient of praise, no doubt; however, it's not innovative. I've said this over and over again- what is so confusing?
      • Aaron, Samba is popular due to Windows popularity, yes. But it also extends SMB (has more features), and also, they are not reinventing the weel. We already HAD better alternatives, but these guys just took what was mainstream used and made it better, whiout any help from Microsoft and without any real budget.

        So this is why the get the award IHMO. Also, Microsoft innovating? How? Inventing a web browser? Inventing TCP/IP? Inventing a PC? Inventing the mouse? The graphical UI? The first DOS? The spreadsheet concept? Inventing the Messenger style communicators?

        Please let me know which innovations are from MS and I will begin to understand.
        • Man, you do it too. Confuse my saying that Samba doesn't do anything innovative with "Samba sux0rz and M$ r00lz!!!" That's not what I'm saying.

          Slightly improving on something doesn't count as innovation. Well, according to Microsoft it does occasionally, but is that what you really want? For all open source projects to be just like MS even in their propaganda?

          That's great he did it with no help from MS (why would he get it from them?) and no budget. That's awesome, and open source and free software definitely can work. But just because it's useful it doesn't mean that it's innovative, it means that it works well. Samba has allowed connectivity between Unix and Windows for a huge heap of people. But that doesn't make it innovative, it makes it popular.

          In this case, MS didn't innovate either. They didn't invent the SMB/CIFS format. But they did popularize it, and if it weren't for MS making it relevant, no one would care about Samba. There's no reason a person on an all-Linux network would use Samba any more than they would AppleTalk.

          The very thing that makes Samba worthwhile is that MS popularized it. Sure, SMB/CIFS exists in LanMAN, OS/2 and others, but those are piddly in comparison with the install base of Windows which has driven the development of Samba. Maybe you're not comfortable with that, but perhaps you shouldn't be using Samba+Windows.

          What in the slashkiddie brain equates "open source project doesn't innovate" with "Microsoft does?" There's not some cosmic dichotomy between OS/FS and MS, where is one doesn't innovate in a particular area the other one does by default.

          I don't use any MS products, except for at a 6 hr/week job. I'm not sure why the string of MS products has to do with this.
          • I ask you a question, what good is innovating if you can't comunicate? Samba allows comunication. It's NOT supposed to be innovative.

            I understand your point but fail to understand your critic. Open Source HAS indeed innovated in many areas. But that doesn't mean you don't need products that people already use and find very usefull not to say a must have. Thus the replacement or "coping" of some windows apps. But Microsoft didn't invent them either so the credit goes to some small companies and invididuals and nobody gives them a god damn credit about that.

            I which "usefull" innovative products get recognition, yet value a lot the fact that i Samba allows me to deploy Linux NOW where would be otherwise imposible.

  • Samba will never really catch on ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by shrikel ( 535309 ) <hlagfarj&gmail,com> on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:05PM (#3492348)
    ... until it has been ported to Windows.

    (It's a joke. Laugh.)

  • congrats team! it's a wonderful, and easy to use program (even for a non-computer guy like me)

    i noticed there's a poll on the same page about whether people will keep MS products, or go to open source wholesale... with the /. effect, i have a feeling the last selection will win...

    • At this point, this is how it looks:

      No way. We use Office and are satisified with it.
      10.80%

      No way. We aren't satisified with Office, but we're in too deep to cut ties.
      6.61%

      We would at least evaluate an open source alternative.
      28.74%
      We would consider installing an alternative suite on a select few desktops.
      14.44%

      We would consider a wholesale replacement of Office.
      39.41%

      I couldn't help but notice the lack of "our company have already chosen an alternative to the skyhigh prices after the release of XP (Windows and Office). I guess that wouldn't get a very high score, but at least it applies to the company I work for.

  • well deserved.

  • And the three are (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MosesJones ( 55544 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:15PM (#3492406) Homepage

    1) Samba - Created to bypass MS braindead sharing, and to allow Linux to act as file servers, so HW and OS platform choice is irrelevant

    2) Java - Created to make HW + OS Platform choice irrelevant

    3) BEA, based on a standard approach to app servers that makes chosing the HW and OS a best fit decision.

    Anyone spot the connection ? 3 Tools all made to bring together disparate environments.

    But of course this sort of thing can't be done, you can't be modular, you can't be portable, you can't be flexible (Java comes in versions for Smart Cards, Phones, PDAs, PCs, Servers and Mainframes) I know that because the DOJ believe it.

  • Congrats, guys (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GMFTatsujin ( 239569 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:17PM (#3492419) Homepage
    I've got a teenie three-node network at home - two Windows computers and a Mandrake server. It's not much, but it gets me there. :)

    Samba is absolutely the most important service running on the server. It lets my wife and I share files, print whenever we like, and maintain private backups off of our computers. I'd put it down as the single most useful software package for anyone who wants to run a home network. It's the one we use most often and most transparently. Well, that and Squid...

    When Microsoft completely and irrevocably blocks out Samba, that's when Windows goes out the door forever. But seeing as how we haven't budged from 98SE since it came out, I don't know that's really going to be a problem.

    Smaba team, you folks rock my weird little computing world. Well done, and totally deserved.
    GMFTatsujin
    • god you can go from a semi-stable OS like mandrake to Windows 98SE?!?!

      I had to upgrade my windows box just to tolerate it (heh corprate version of XP...oooooohhhh...yeaaahhh)
  • Isn't it amazing that a ubiquitous software company's (MS) ill-designed (SMB), poorly implemented (NETBios) system for exposing resources to a network has become so pervasive and constricting that the IT industry starts giving _high_ _honors_ to an open-source product (Samba) that essentially embodies an acknowledgment that SMB will not evolve into something more sensible (NFS, for example) any time soon? So what should the authors say at the acceptance ceremony? "Thanks Microsoft. We couldn't have done it without you!"
  • I've recently started looking into setting up a domain at home based on Samba. However, to be of any use to me, it must be able to support domain trust relationships so that I can have seamless access to the domain at work (via a VPN).

    Can anybody tell me, or point to resources that explain how to do this? As far as I can tell, the latest stable version of Samba doesn't support this. Does anybody know if it's even slated for the future, and preferably before NT4 gets moved to unsupported status by MSFT? I had a look at Samba TNG, but their docs aren't much help. Unfortunately, I don't have as much time as I would like to just download, install it on my Debian box, and experiment.
    • It's not really important to have domain trusts - I think all that buys you is 'log into one machine and access everything' - you can still access shares as a seperate machine outside the domain as long as you supply a username / password.

      Fer instance, whenever I mount an NT share on Linux I use "smbmount \\\\server\\share /mnt/server -o username=administraitor", then it asks for a pswd, and if that matches a user w/ permission your in.

  • slashdot me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hij ( 552932 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @02:22PM (#3492438) Homepage
    I can't believe that PC Magazine would even consider samba. I just assumed that they only paid attention to companies that bought massive amounts of ad space from their magazine. Go figure. Then again, maybe they figured that this would be a good way to get slashdotted.

    Come to think of it, maybe that's the way to spread the gospel of open source. Recognize good stuff and get slashdotted...

  • Cool (Score:1)

    by Ixe ( 547791 )
    Go Samba!
    Though, I've had limited success with the new versions of samba and swat and all (for some reason I had no trouble figureing it out RH6.2 and RH7.2 through config files but my mdk 8.2 still doesn't work quite right) Even with that... SAMBA RULEZ B-)
  • The Enterprise will learn what alot SMBs already know. Samba rocks as a drop in replacement for an NT file and print box.
    In small offices all the users need to know is that they have a new domain password. And poof! NT is gone.
    If you're admin in a small business or support/consult for multiple ones, sit down with the deci$ion maker and compare the virtues of *bsd/*nix running Samba to WinNT/2k with its licencing and security issues.
    You WILL close the deal.
    No wonder MS would like to see them go away.

    the 'slide

  • ... Microsoft pulls all it's ads out of PC Magazine?

    :)

    Wouldn't surprise me if they did, given how hostile they are against the good folks at Samba.


  • A stunning achievement!
  • This stuff infuriates me. The general public does not understand their peril simply because they do not understand the platform. However, if we translated what was unraveling in the technology world to a political platform, there would be massive outrage.

    The GPL would be equivalent to freedom of speech, freedom of expression and the freedom to choose. Microsoft would be seen as a totalitarian government whose hopes an ambitions are to destroy the basic freedoms that you and I have come to know and love.

    We need to educate the masses on this problem, this isn't just ours, its everyone who enjoys the freedom to choose, the freedom to express and the freedom to speak their opinions. Get this in the media, do a compare and contrast of Microsoft and a Totalitarian government. Being making Microsoft a symbol of singularism and a dictorship. This is going to far, Microsoft must be stopped.
  • ...for SWAT to come with an SSL option (like webmin does), instead of wrapping with stunnel.
  • My understanding was that it was a spec, not software itself. Am I wrong? Or was this Sun's implementation (software) of the J2EE spec?
    • Correct... J2EE is a spec, J2SE is a VM specification and platform. Sun was nominated for the J2SE toolkit. J2SE 1.4 is pretty impressive, but I agree that Samba is quite amazing, and worthy of the award.
  • I wonder if MS will continue to use the leverage of DMCA to ensure SAMBA's demise. A great product is about to meet the MS giant if the DOJ settles like it appears it wants to.

    Great job folks. I hope we get to see new releases for years to come and I do not mean to rain on your parade. Instead I wish to remind everyone what is at stake in this.

  • MS questioned over CIFS license in antitrust trial (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Andy Tai ( 1884 ) on Thursday May 09, 2002 @03:32PM (#3492865) Homepage
    It is worth pointing out here that, as mentioned in the linked yahoo story (also appeaing in news.com [com.com]), Microsoft's corporate vice president in charge of the innards of Windows, Rob Short, has been questioned over the CIFS license issue [advogato.org] by the states' lawyers. It is interesting to see what kind of impact will the anti-GPL CIFS license have in the outcome of the trial.
  • Astonishing, really, the lengths to which Microsoft seems to go sometimes to piss on their own shoes. Here, they demonstrate by their hamfisted tactics how great is their disdain for the rest of computerdom. It's to ponder: Does no one in their executive boardroom consider that, in shoving Open Source developers more fully away from having anything to do with Microsoft, they're increasing the likelhood of their own eventual irrelevance?

Slashdot Top Deals

A fail-safe circuit will destroy others. -- Klipstein

Close