Luke in his "best textbooks on every subject" post calls out the book as inaccurate, with a link to this post (only available on archive). (I don't have any strong opinions on this, but figured that this might be useful context)
I also don't have strong opinions on how accurate the book is, but that link really doesn't support the claim that the book is inaccurate. Its most scathing criticism of Russell: "As far as the omissions go, the grossest is the denial of any role to Eastern philosophy." Something I'm inclined to forgive in a "History of Western Philosophy". Then there are complaints about "inconsequential logical griping...from place to place" in the book, which again is not really a devastating blow.
I was going to post this also. I was expecting much more specific and pointed accuracy critiques, but the linked review mostly seems to grouse about emphasis.
Notes from Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy, in particular the sections on ancient philosophy and theology.
I also made a rough diagram of the flow of intellectual influence through the ages - again focusing on ancient philosophers, but with a few modern ones thrown in when there was a particularly strong link. Philosophers most associated with one big idea or virtue have it noted beneath them. The graph is surprisingly neat (and planar!), no doubt because I've simplified a lot of relationships and overlooked many more - don't interpret this as anything more than an outline.