Samba is compiled without CUPS support. You need to delete Patch11 from the spec file, and the %patch11 tag. There was a comment that libcups.a was required to compile--this is true; however, libcups.a is not required to run samba, and having CUPS compiled into samba does not require that you actually have and/or use CUPS. Please fix this bug in your spec file. It's very annoying to install RedHat tested and approved packages, only to find out that critical bits of given applications have been left out (even though having them in and not using them does not adversely affect system performance), and having to re-write your spec files and recompile/install the borked application.
Actually, enabling cups support makes the package *require* cups, as it's linked in as a shared library.
(FYI, we did build it like this for a while, which is how we found this out.) We really won't make packages in the distro have shared library requirements that aren't in the base distribution.
Samba compiled with CUPS support does not require that cups be installed. I can say that with personal experience. I currently have samba 2.0.7 installed on one of my machines. It supports cups. It was compiled on a box that had cups installed. It is currently installed and running on a box that does not have CUPS installed. Samba compiled with CUPS support does not require that you have CUPS libraries installed; furthermore, it is a trivial enough addition that having it compiled to support CUPS does not create any overhead. With due respect to the work that you guys do, you are incorrect in this matter. As a company I view RedHat as trying to make things easier for its users. Such things as compiling CUPS support into samba--which contrary to your responses does *not* require and CUPS libs to be installed alongside the samba installation--shows people what your company thinks of them. The fact that you actually went out of your way to delete CUPS support (which is surprising since it seems RedHat is trying half-heartedly to promote this excellent system) indicates that RedHat either has not researched effectively all of the implications for something so simple. Which I understand is a monumental task--you guys can't catch everything. Which is why people like me file reports like this.
What you're saying we should do is ship a samba package that will be different than one built on a full install (since the full install won't have cups installed, you can't build cups support into samba). This is not an option.