[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 04:06:37PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
The use of multiple backends in passdb has acknowledged issues, and I'm
not particularly fussed if you feel it should not ship with this
functionality enabled. However, please do note that this
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:15:01AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [PATCH]
sam backend parameter':
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 04:06:37PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
The use of multiple backends in passdb has acknowledged issues, and I'm
not particularly fussed if you feel it should
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 03:01, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Simo Sorce wrote:
Plus I have some questions about the current sam interface:
- what is all the context thing needed for?
I don't like global variables, and this allows us to construct seperate
contexts for operations like sam2sam,
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 08:34:47PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote about 'Re: [PATCH] sam
backend parameter':
There is no intention to create a similar backend for the sam. Instead,
we do intend to solve this problem in exactly the way you indicate
below. There is no intention to provide
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 07:22, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 12:16:53AM +0200, Simo Sorce wrote about 'Re: [PATCH] sam
backend parameter':
yes a thing I'm not sure has ever been a good idea.
to be able to have sam2sam that is really read a backend + store all
info
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 08:06, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let just remove the multi-domain stuff for now and try
and get 3.0 in a shippable state.
The 'new SAM' stuff is not being proposed for 3.0! Certainly not yet,
we have a *lot* of work to do, before it gets
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 08:47, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well it's not being used really, as it's not in a production
release. We don't make guarentees until it gets into a production
release. What non-passdb users are being mapped into the system
via this method ?
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 08:06, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let just remove the multi-domain stuff for now and try
and get 3.0 in a shippable state.
The 'new SAM' stuff is not being proposed for 3.0! Certainly not yet,
we have a *lot* of work
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 12:34, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Simo Sorce wrote:
It is all a question on how and where you use them.
^^
Except that global variables are particularly nasty in C - we don't have
an autoprototyper on them, and we cannot
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:25:39PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
I've seen Volker's patches, and I think that passdb can be made to work
for the needs of 3.0, but it is messy. I believe the code as it
*currently stands* can support 'net rpc vampire', but will consult
volker more closely on
Gerald Carter wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Eddie Lania wrote:
Like I've said, I'm not a developer, but maybe the multiple domain
support parameter could be extended with the backend method? Like this:
multiple domain support = DOMA:backendA, DOMB:backendB, etc
Can someone please
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 09:19:47AM -0500, Gerald Carter wrote about 'Re: [PATCH] sam
backend parameter':
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Eddie Lania wrote:
Like I've said, I'm not a developer, but maybe the multiple domain
support parameter could be extended with the backend method? Like
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 12:30:30AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Gerald Carter wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Eddie Lania wrote:
Like I've said, I'm not a developer, but maybe the multiple domain
support parameter could be extended with the backend method? Like this:
multiple
- what is all the context thing needed for?
Sometimes we need multiple contexts. For example, when doing sam2sam.
Please notice that passdb has this as well...
Jelmer
--
Jelmer Vernooij [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://nl.linux.org/~jelmer/
Development And Underdevelopment:
Gerald Carter wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The other cases for 'multiple domain' support involve the way these
users are reflected back into unix by winbindd, which might be running
on a system that has multiple, independent smbd instances on separate
IPs.
Simo Sorce wrote:
Plus I have some questions about the current sam interface:
- what is all the context thing needed for?
I don't like global variables, and this allows us to construct seperate
contexts for operations like sam2sam, and testing, without fiddiling
with global variables.
-
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 12:16:53AM +0200, Simo Sorce wrote about 'Re: [PATCH] sam
backend parameter':
yes a thing I'm not sure has ever been a good idea.
to be able to have sam2sam that is really read a backend + store all
info into another backend we may take several ways.
We never need
Simo Sorce wrote:
Multi domain DC is never going to happen in samba, it just doesn't make
sense, as the protocols used (eg. SMB) will not be able to support such
thing, so please let's stop to talk about multi-DC samba.
I'm not so sure on this one.
Some parts of the protocol might need to
Eddie Lania wrote:
Well, I'm starting to think our syntax is just getting too complex. All
the 'solutions' for putting 'domain' in there just look ugly!
Some poor admin has to construct this line, and even if they don't use
multidomain stuff (and that's almost everybody), then
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 12:59:47PM +0200, Eddie Lania wrote:
Well, I'm starting to think our syntax is just getting too complex. All
the 'solutions' for putting 'domain' in there just look ugly!
Some poor admin has to construct this line, and even if they don't use
multidomain
Well, I'm starting to think our syntax is just getting too complex.
All
the 'solutions' for putting 'domain' in there just look ugly!
Some poor admin has to construct this line, and even if they don't
use
multidomain stuff (and that's almost everybody), then have to read
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:48:34AM +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote about
'[PATCH] sam backend parameter':
Hi Jelmer,
here's a patch witch changes the syntax of the sam backend parameter:
now it's plugin[|DOMAIN][:options] ... I think it nicer:-)
If you didn't accept that patch
22 matches
Mail list logo
