Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 26th Mar 2011 02:00 UTC
Mac OS X When you run smbd -V on your Snow Leopard installation, you'll see it's running SAMBA version 3.0.28a-apple. While I'm not sure how much difference the "-apple" makes, version 3.0.28a is old. Very old. In other words, it's riddled with bugs. Apple hasn't updated SAMBA in 3 years, and for Lion, they're dumping it altogether for something homegrown. The reason? SAMBA is now GPLv3.
Thread beginning with comment 468147
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Likewise
by akro on Mon 28th Mar 2011 22:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Likewise"
akro
Member since:
2005-07-06

There is a native cifs implementation that doesn't seem to depend on samba... although I haven't played with it

http://www.likewise.com/resources/documentation_library/manuals/cif...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Likewise
by oiaohm on Mon 28th Mar 2011 23:12 in reply to "RE[2]: Likewise"
oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

There is a native cifs implementation that doesn't seem to depend on samba... although I haven't played with it

http://www.likewise.com/resources/documentation_library/manuals/cif...


You are mad if you use that. Seriously. It GPLv2 same as Old samba. Because it is old Samba. Apple would be just as well off where they are.

Yes its a samba fork pre NTFS filesystem compatibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Message_Block

Really out of all the SMB server and client software out there.

Only 2 have SMB2. MS implementations and Samba implementations.

To top that off. Additions by third parties to SMB2 are already being written. http://www.unixsmb2.org

This is the big problem you hit. SMB protocal is not MS alone. MS has written what they want in it with SMB2 now the Unix/Posix guys are going to add what they want.

So a lot of implementers are basically sitting on the side line until the storm blows over.

Yes its really simple to think the last party to write an alteration to the protocol is the owner.

Samba in history has the core of been the neutral one between all vendors with the most support all round. No particular implementer givin favoritism.

From what I am hearing from apple is they are wanting to implement their own. Or is it there own? Title Apple is using that Apple might pay MS for a copy of their implementation.

Reply Parent Score: 2