(sorry again for a possible duplicate) Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 10:00:38PM +0600, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > >> 1) I disagree with the change made in r166: "Full install of samba, and placed it before xfce to allow it to use the libs". Rationale for my disagreement: Xfce never uses samba libs. It only runs "nmblookup" and "smbclient" programs. >> >> Have you any other reason for full SAMBA installation, including daemons? Maybe it's better to revert this (for disk space reasons) and add installation of "nmblookup" to /usr/bin? > > Well, we certainly can. Though, all said, the size of the resultant iso > isn't really that much bigger. The one I just produced that has the full > Samba installation is 355 Mb. The question becomes, would anyone find the > full install useful? If not, then certainly, we can revert. OK, let's wait until someone says that he wants a full SAMBA installation. And let the full installation stay for now. >> Also it may be better to have a non-empty default smb.conf. Maybe: >> >> [global] >> workgroup = WORKGROUP >> >> # Please edit those according to your region >> dos charset = CP850 >> unix charset = ISO-8859-1 >> display charset = ISO-8859-1 > > Why? What good does that do? The blank conf file works fine here, No, it doesn't. With a blank conf file, SAMBA will store filenames in UTF-8 which is not the locale encoding and is not officially supported by LFS. The example settings were chosen so that they will be right for the majority of supported locales (i.e. in all ISO-8859-1 based locales and only in them). Strictly speaking, "display charset" isn't needed because it is (correctly) determined from the current locale. But the default of "unix charset" to UTF-8 is certainly not appropriate for LFS. > and if you already know you're going to have to edit it to match your > workgroup and charset, those defaults aren't going to do you any good > anyway. Show me > what advantage it gives us (it's not like it's a huge deal, it's just one > small conf file, but I would like to know *why* we're doing it before we > do.) It's a good idea to hint the reader that there are settings they want to change. Also the change of those paramaters' names (and their values) between SAMBA 2.2 and 3.0 is still a FAQ in Russian Linux-related forums. >> 2) The /dev/mouse TODO item has been removed recently, but the result is not the same as required by that item. Namely, the /dev/mouse symlink now points to /dev/input/mouse0, not /dev/input/mice. Is this OK? > > > It produces the desired behaviour, namely the /dev/mouse link pointing to > a working mouse. This is mostly for the sake of Xorg - I've tested it and > it works fine here. Though I would appreiciate it if someone with a usb > mouse could test it and make sure it works for them. Anyway, there's inconsistency between Xorg and gpm setup. Xorg uses /dev/mouse which points to /dev/input/mouse0. gpm uses /dev/psaux which is a deprecated alias for /dev/input/mice. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
