On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 07:07:48PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Sergio Talens-Oliag ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > I'm also interested in being able to run two different samba servers and > > when > > trying to set the ldap admin password I've found that bug... is there any > > reason not to add the given patch or an updated one?
> (patch by Jacobo adding "cache dir" and "state dir" configuration parameters) > Well, apart from the huge work involved in going through all bug > reports and triage them, nothing..:-) > I would vote to forward this patch to upstream because adding new > configuration parameters impacts the documentation and we certainly > don't want to have Debian's samba to behave differently from upstream. Um, it's not an upstream bug. The Debian FHS patch disables the existing 'lock dir' option because it has non-FHS semantics; and it doesn't provide runtime configuration options for the internal cache dir and state dir values, because at the time it was written they seemed unnecessary. There's been enough demand for this that they're probably worth adding, though as has been noted in the past, one can very effectively shoot oneself in the foot by running two copies of Samba on a single system (if they share the same directory and don't use kernel oplocks, having separate cache dirs is a great way to corrupt your data!). I'm not keen to create Debian-specific smb.conf options, though; the FHS patch desperately needs to be forwarded/integrated upstream, but this is going to take a fair amount of time for someone to discuss it with all the affected parties, work out which branch it should be integrated on, etc. I'm confident that the FHS patch does the right thing by Debian, but it may not meet the needs of other vendors. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
