?: RegConnectRegistry for UNIX

Rich Pettit richp at resolute.com
Tue Nov 10 22:50:49 GMT 1998

> > An important question I have is this:  Since Samba 2.0 contains code that
> > implements library functionality, will some of the code be covered under
> > LGPL instead of GPL so that vendors can use these functions without giving
> > away the farm?
> no, it will not.  do you really want every joe-company to produce their
> own registry tools; NT-compatible Primary Domain Controller etc?  not
> least because this is still immature code and if i get it wrong you can
> take down an NT box real quick....

I understand your concern.  Speaking for myself, I develop code for
performance analysis, both professionally and as one of my 15 hobbies.
My interest in registry access is to assess the performance of a
huge network of NT boxes without installing software on every one of them.

This access is, or course, all read-only.

Without LGPL, your code will be a nice proof of concept, but I won't be
able to use it and we'll have to settle with having one NT proxy.

As for taking down the NT box quick, I'm sure you've seen winnuke.  It's
not a complex matter.

+-                  -+-                             -+-                     -+
|   Richard Pettit   |  Chief Performance Architect  |   4473 Willow Road    |
| richp at resolute.com |    Resolute Software, Inc.    |      Suite 200        |
|   (925) 737-4076   |       www.resolute.com        |  Pleasanton CA 94588  |
+-                  -+-                             -+-                     -+

More information about the samba-technical mailing list