[samba-technical has been removed from addresses because it's for discussing source code.]
l. a. walsh wrote: > I recently upgraded my Linux distro to SuSE 8.1 which > came w/samba 2.2.5. > > A feature of the upgrade was that it 'split' the startup > script for samba from 1 script for _smb_ & _nmb_ to 2 scripts. Wow, you are right. I have an installation of SuSE 8.1 here, and had to boot it up to check. Looks like I have a note to add to Chapter 2... > Question is this: is there any good reason > for splitting the two or making so one is runnable w/o the other? AFAIK, SuSE is the only Linux distribution that does this. But ... now I'll have to check a few others and see. I'd guess that they split them up (having both a smb and nmb script in /etc/init.d) to allow the two daemons to be controlled independently. That is, you can do a # /etc/init.d/nmb restart and restart just nmbd, without having to restart smbd. > So how/why would splitting these scripts be a good thing? I think it's a matter of opinion whether or not this is better. Obviously, someone at SuSE thinks it is! :) I'd suggest writing a script that does something like: #!/bin/bash /etc/init.d/smb $1 /etc/init.d/nmb $1 That way, it will work like Red Hat and other distributions, so you can start/stop/restart/(etc.) Samba with one command. Jay Ts -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
