> Just a guess, but probably what is registered is an e-mail address like 3215551212@sprintpcs.com
This makes perfect sense; I received a new email account recently and began receiving frequent email from Yahoo! Personals. I have no account with Yahoo!, so I couldn't log into one to discontinue the emails. I emailed their account services twice (10-14 and 11-1 of this year) about the problem, and they finally took my email address off their list. I haven't had a problem since then.
> Hold it! if you have any NT4.0 boxes in your > building samba print servers WILL NOT WORK. there > is a nasty bug in NT4.0 that keeps samba from > sucessfully letting NT4.0 use the printers. This > bug is not there in 3.11,95,98,me,2000 or XP.
In my experience, this bug is not there in NT4.0 either, as the lab in which I formerly worked had 80+ NT4.0 workstations that printed on 3 samba print servers. Is there any other record of this bug to which you refer?
Slashdot Mirror
One trilogy to rule them all, one trilogy to find them. One trilogy to bring them all and in the theaters bind them...
> Just a guess, but probably what is registered is an e-mail address like 3215551212@sprintpcs.com
This makes perfect sense; I received a new email account recently and began receiving frequent email from Yahoo! Personals. I have no account with Yahoo!, so I couldn't log into one to discontinue the emails. I emailed their account services twice (10-14 and 11-1 of this year) about the problem, and they finally took my email address off their list. I haven't had a problem since then.
The opposite of this post would be a very short post with lots of pictures about writing a novel.
> Hold it! if you have any NT4.0 boxes in your
> building samba print servers WILL NOT WORK. there
> is a nasty bug in NT4.0 that keeps samba from
> sucessfully letting NT4.0 use the printers. This
> bug is not there in 3.11,95,98,me,2000 or XP.
In my experience, this bug is not there in NT4.0 either, as the lab in which I formerly worked had 80+ NT4.0 workstations that printed on 3 samba print servers. Is there any other record of this bug to which you refer?