Linkage dependencies
Gerald Carter
gcarter at valinux.com
Tue Dec 5 17:50:19 GMT 2000
"Mayers, Philip J" wrote:
>
> All,
>
> The SMB extended security support (which is
> currently stalled waiting on an "outside party" <ahem>)
> uses the prs_init and smb_io_rpc_auth_ntlmssp_* functions
> - these are already linked into smbd, but not libsmb -
> so now libsmb depends on the RPC parsing functions, which
> in turn depend on the passdb functions.
the client side RPC's should be in a spearate library i think.
libmsrpc.[a|so]
So to summarize, I think we should have
o libsmb.a
o libmsrpc.a
o passdb.a
> Is this ok? I don't believe it's sensible to have
> two sets of functions that (un)marshall/process the same
> thing, but the linkage dependencies make me uncertain
> (especially if the guys from Caldera are splitting out libsmb
> as a separate library). Note that if my hunch is right,
> the RPC auth code might need reworking too, making
> them more tightly dependent on each other.
Could you describe the actually dependencies more
(i haven't dig through the current code for this).
Or point me towards a previous summary in the archives.
What structures / functions exactrly are causing the problems?
> Thoughts? Libtoolise the lot as shared libraries
> (which is the "right" thing to do anyway)?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
/\ Gerald (Jerry) Carter Professional Services
\/ http://www.valinux.com/ VA Linux Systems gcarter at valinux.com
http://www.samba.org/ SAMBA Team jerry at samba.org
http://www.plainjoe.org/ jerry at plainjoe.org
"...a hundred billion castaways looking for a home."
- Sting "Message in a Bottle" ( 1979 )
More information about the samba-technical
mailing list