I'm not sure why I need that. As I stated, I'm a little new to Samba and
AD. For some reason, my research suggests that to get AD, I need Samba 4.
The person who manages our Netware, and who will be assuming the
responsibility of managing all of this once installed wants to keep as
much of the similarities between Samba and Netware as he/she can. We are
replacing Netware with Samba as a file services device.
steve
On 4/22/2014 9:59 AM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Am 18.04.2014 17:49, schrieb Steve Campbell:
>> I'm a little new to Samba when used as more than just a simple place to
>> mount a single user to a single share, but we're now getting ready to
>> replace our Netware servers with Samba, and I guess that means Active
>> Directory DC.
>>
>> As I read more and more about this beast, I keep finding pages that
>> indicate the samba4 rpms supplied with the Centos/RH distribution are
>> not the full version and that I should get them from either samba.org or
>> certain other sources that provide complete versions. These pages are a
>> little dated, but not that old.
>>
>> Can anyone provide insight into what they've done in this situation and
>> whether the samba rpms are now full versions? Most of what I have found
>> on the web is dated around when samba4 just came out of beta through a
>> little later.
> <snip>
> One question: why do you need samba 4? We're running 3.6.9 (the current)
> on CentOS 6.5, in a moderately complex environment, and we connect to AD
> (and kerberos, I think - I don't normally touch samba).
>
> mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
