Scott Robbinsscottro at nyc.rr.com
Mon Sep 1 04:58:19 UTC 2008
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:52:59PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > Scott Robbins wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 06:51:24PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote: >>> >>> > > When I was reading through some documentation a few weeks ago, > specifically the "Samba by Example" book: > > http://us1.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-Guide/ > > I was surprised that the "more basic" examples were commonly using > security = share. I thought I had read somewhere in the past that > security = share was either deprecated or at least not recommended hence > my surprise at seeing it being used in the official documentation. > Personally I've always used user level security but share level would > certainly ease a few potential headaches for new users requiring a > "quick and dirty" share. > > Just so we're all on the same page, does anyone know (or have any views) I don't have enough knowledge to state an informed opinion--however, you're not wrong, I also definitely remember coming across the fact that security = share was either deprecated or at least not recommended. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Joyce: You belong in a good old fashioned college with keg parties and boys. Not here with Hellmouths and vampires. Buffy: Not really seeing the distinction.
More information about the CentOS-docs mailing list