[juneau-lug] Re: Samba 3.0

  • From: James Zuelow <e5z8652@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: juneau-lug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 18:02:17 -0800

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:46:19 -0800
"Jamie" <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Yes!  We are definitely interested in what is new & better in SAMBA
> 3.  At work we switched all our file servers to SAMBA last summer
> and its been mostly great but left a few problems. 
> 
> 1) incremental backups no longer work via Veritas Backup Exec.  They
> have a linux agent, but it doesn't "hear" the archive bit.
> 
Heh.  I've got enough trouble getting Veritas Backup Exec working on
Win2k boxes.  :)  That may be a Veritas solution, as other backup
solutions (Amanda, etc.) do incremental backups.

> 2) Our primary authentication via SAMBA no longer expires users 
> passwords or sends reminders.  SMB password changes will cause linux
> to sync up, but not vice versa.  New users have to go into linux
> first.
> 
I've been out of the Samba loop for too long to tell you whether or
not this is better for 3.0 or not.  I have a 2.2 Samba install that
I've just left running without thinking about it much, waiting for the
official 3.0 release.

> 3) Working with permissions is not as versatile as with Netware, no
> ACL's. 
> 

Perhaps a file system issue?  You can implement ACLs for Linux but
IIRC you need special kernel and/or fs mods.  I saw an article on it
just recently - Linux Mag or Linux Journal.  I'll look it up.  Samba
itself may or may not be able to control this.

I'll try to have a good demo with handouts & config file examples
ready for the November meeting - I don't know if I'll have time to get
one up for October, and we've still got Justin's OpenMosix to cover in
October.  I'll specifically look at the points you brought up.

Cheers,

James

------------------------------------
This is the Juneau-LUG mailing list.
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to juneau-lug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the 
word unsubscribe in the subject header.

Other related posts: