Joe (W),

I intended to reply privately but then found out that most of the
remarks might also be interesting for HP3000-L discussion/people...

>Date sent:        Sun, 23 Mar 1997 21:52:48 GMT
>From:             Joe Whitlock <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:          Re: Samba 0.6 - Great Job!
>To:               [log in to unmask]
>
>Joe Geiser wrote:
>>
>> I put 0.6 on a 3000 running 5.5 using the listener (haven't used under
>> INETD yet) and the performance is wonderful!
>>
></snip>
>
>I would also like to thank Lars for the wonderful service he has
>provided by porting SAMBAix!!!
>
>Guest access works great to HP 3000 Samba server!
>Validated access works great to HP 3000 Samba server!
>Win95 client to HP 3000 server printing works great!
>HP3000 client to PC server printing using smbclient works great!
>
>I'm sharing my smb.conf file with you all, and I hope some of you
>will share your configurations with the group!!!

(...)

Thank you very much for the kind words. I especially appreciate
that you mentioned the various methods you are using Samba/iX as
it gives me a better idea what works and what might be useful in
the real world.

Both aspects (works/useful) are important for me as I am not a
heavy Samba/iX user myself (I'm not a heavy PC user, especially
at work where I mainly work with an X11 based UX workstation).

It's kind of funny. At IPROF I talked to Mike "Java/iX" Yawn and
he also experienced this "porter's fate" i.e. when you port the
stuff (to MPE) you spend most of the time with the C source code,
compiling, debugging etc. instead of using the product yourself.

Thanks also for sharing the smb.conf file as it is very educational
to see various configuration options in a real context instead of
just wading through the man page for the smb.conf file. Your print
command implementation is really "cool" (I guess you're on 5.0).

>Note: I use MGR.SAMBA vs MANAGER.SYS as my Server logon user
>      I gave MGR.SAMBA the same capabilities as MANAGER.SYS

I'm always a little worried running the SMBD and/or NMBD programs
under a user with SM/OP/PM capabilities, maybe because only I know
that even I did not read and understand the whole source code or
SMB protocol specifications ;-)

I feel much better when I still have the file system security to
shield my 3000 from potentially harmful (mis-) behaviour of freeware
like Samba or HTTP or whatever. Undetected bugs (in the original or
introduced by the port) can do far less damage if the programs run
as plain user (or AM user) most of the(ir) time...

Another aspect might be "hackers" attempts. In case there are some
general security vulnerabilities with a service (did you notice the
security warnings for ..-UX recently ;-) it seems always better to
have the server process run with the least possible privileges.

Do you remember which Samba features/functions did not work properly
when MGR.SAMBA had just plain account manager's capabilities (+ PH)?

Thanks again,

Lars/iX ([log in to unmask])