Hi James, > > I see ... > > In that case, I'd recommend paring down the information (particularly > about the exit codes) so that it's clear that the intended > administrative interface is SMF.
The exit codes in nbtd(1M) are the same as those in smbd(1M), which was recommended when smbd(1M) was reviewed during the CIFS server case. (PSARC/2006/715) >>In addition to the man pages being delivered, the Windows >>Interoperability documentation (Getting Started Guide, Admin Guide and >>Troubleshooting Guide) will be updated to cover these changes. > > > Does smb(4) or some other existing man page need a pointer to the nbtd > page? We will raise CRs against smbd(1M) and smb(4) manpage, to include references to nbtd(1M) and nmb(4) manpage. The diffs in the smbd(1M) manpage, listed in the fasttrack, calls out for addition of nbtd(1M) and nmb(4) in the SEE ALSO section. > (Not that I care much, but "nbtd" is a pretty obscure name for the > service. "nbt" would be better, and just plain "netbios" would > probably be even better still ... though I realize it doesn't provide > _all_ of NetBIOS.) > The service is named as "nbt" i.e. SMF service with an FMRI of "svc:/network/nbt:default". (No preference here. We could call the service "netbios") The daemon is named as "nbtd". Thanks for the comments.
