On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 10:25:25AM -0600, Troy.A Johnson wrote: >Where do you get "a."? Probably heresy. I was told that Microsoft was planning to "Discontinue" Win2k and require people to upgrade" Some bullshit about the EULA. Naturally this made me a little nervous since I'd read on the samba mailing lists that support for XP was non-existent for PDC (which has probably changed according to Nate's success) and since I use a samba PDC here.... I grabbed a copy of XP and slapped it up in vmware to give it a go and had little luck. It appeared that it joined the domain o.k. till i tried to login at which point i was promptly told that "The trust relationship to the server has been lost" which I had determined to be related to the RPC changes I'd read about. Nate, if you've got some linkage handy with regard to the registry hack I'd apprecitate it. Otherwise now that I know what to look for I'll look myself. >I am lucky (good or bad, who knows) in >regard to "b.". Hey, it maybe less "functional" than a true M$ PDC but it sure beats the hell out of the licensing and headache of maintaining a NT/2k server... I'd rather suck lint out of a dryer vent than admin M$ products, but that's just me. > >I've been told that licensing requirements >for XP violate MN state law with regard to >private data (at very least the kind I and >mine tend), so I probably won't see it >anytime soon. God I hope you're right. I kinda like Win2k (for my users) and would be sad to see it go in favor of XP. Thus far i'm not impressed with it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20020328/041ddae1/attachment.pgp