On Thursday 2013-09-12 08:39, Hans Witvliet wrote:
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Thursday 2013-09-12 00:34, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
I haven't kept track, but: 1) is 4.x now recommended for all cases (i.e. 3.x no longer better for file serving?)
An explanation shall be found on https://lwn.net/Articles/469792/ .
Jan, you wrote "shall be found". That sounds like there is an ongoing discussion there, or that the answer can be found.
Well, the LWN article provides an answer *to me* (summary: "the samba3 file-/printserver entitled 'smbd' survives in samba4", this is also what I gathered from Lars Müller during OSC12), but we all know Linda is special in what constitutes a usable reply.
Only drawback for some they said, was that samba4 had closely integrated all subfunctions, and you could no longer use separate tools like openldap and kerberos.
During CeBIT 2013, I talked to the guys at the SerNet booth, and I was assured that, while samba4 brings its own LDAP and DNS services, you can still roll it with a different LDAP/DNS implementation (at least, that's the plan). That is a necessity given BIND10 is combining DHCP and DNS, and you really really don't want to run around with two DNS processes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org