On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 04:35:11PM +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On 05.03.2015 02:26, wenzong fan wrote: > > On 03/04/2015 07:02 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > >> On 04.03.2015 10:43, wenzong fan wrote: > >>> On 03/04/2015 05:12 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > >>>> Dear Wenzong Fan, > >>>> > >>>> On 04.03.2015 07:18, [email protected] wrote: > >>>>> From: Wenzong Fan <[email protected]> > >>>>> > >>>>> The smb, nmb, winbind services have been disabled for systemd system > >>>>> by default, disable them for sysvinit as well. > >>>> > >>>> why would anybody install these services without the desire for using > >>>> them? Did the patch disabling them for systemd get merged by mistake? I > >>>> remember Paul objecting to it. > >>> > >>> The samba is not a common service that required by system, especially in > >>> some security environment, it should be configured correctly first - > >>> This is why I incline to disable it by default. > >> > >> This doesn't convince me, as the line you're drawing between samba and > >> other services seems to be chosen arbitrarily. > >> > >> "git grep INITSCRIPT_PARAMS.*disable" shows no results in both > >> openembedded-core and meta-openembedded (dizzy). So samba will be the > >> first and only service that's disabled by default and requires manual > >> intervention by the user? Why don't you ship a safe configuration > >> instead? > >> > >> As Paul stated, the distro is responsible for correct configuration. > >> IMHO there's no reason to deviate from common behaviour just because > >> samba seems to be less safe than any other network service in your view. > >> > > > > Ok, thanks for your advises, I agree with you. > > > > Please maintainer ignore my patch. > > > >>> Yes, it did - this may give me some hints that it should be disabled ... > >> > >> Unfortunately I don't understand what you're referring to here. > > > > Sorry for the confusion, it answered you second question about if "the > > patch disabling them for systemd get merged by mistake?". > > > > Yes, the patch for systemd has been merged - It gives me hint that it's > > a proper behavior for samba, but looks it isn't ... > > > > Please refer to the commit: 20a624928c030fa13d8b7d45b4f4d7e1ac624f60 > > > > It should be reverted now! > > You applied this patch to jansa/master. Would you mind reverting > 20a624928c030fa13d8b7d45b4f4d7e1ac624f60 instead, as discussed in this > thread?
It was applied there before this discussion started and I wasn't planing to merge it before seeing some conclusion from this. But you're right, I've moved it to jansa/master-next-unresolved-review branch to make it more obvious and I've added revert of 20a624 to master-next. Thanks, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
