CVS update: samba/source/include

[Simo Sorce]

On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 13:46, Rafal Szczesniak wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:18:23PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 11:53:41AM +0000, Rafal Szczesniak wrote:
> > 
> > > > I think it's not only for an interim stage. Why not leave tdbsam at that? I've
> > > > used the same procedure for the group mapping stuff in pdb.
> > > 
> > > Because when trust passwords are stored in SAM, it's easier to handle SAM
> > > replication either when Samba acts as NT-compatible BDC or Samba BDC. The
> > > former would use pdb calls to replicate passwords and the latter could
> > > enable backend-specific replication e.g. ldap when it is your favour.
> > 
> > pdb_ldap is the whole reason for this stuff. tdbsam is not easily replicable
> > currently, although it could be made to be. My path would really be to get an
> > easy pdb passthrough frontend to the secrets.tdb and then concentrate on
> > pdb_ldap and the favourite sql backend of your choice :-)
> 
> That's almost exactly the way I was thinking about. Your proposition sounds
> even better because skipping tdbsam implementation now, in favour of simple callbacks
> to secrets.c, allows to focus on pdb_ldap and other 'advanced' backends even sooner.
> Looks like we have well thought compromise. Another task, which I think should
> be considered, is replication of tdbsam (perhaps only via rpc calls...).

I'll try to help out with tdbsam.
Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce - simo.sorce at xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it
via Garofalo, 39 - 20133 - Milano
mobile: +39 329 328 7702
tel. +39 02 2953 4143 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399