testparm and smb.conf(5) don't agree on synonyms
luke at mewburn.net
Thu Oct 28 07:24:09 GMT 2004
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 07:01:57PM +0400, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
| On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:54:06AM +1000, Luke Mewburn wrote:
| > Hi again.
| > Whilst building a front-end to smb.conf, I noticed that
| > testparm (and swat?) and smb.conf(5) disagree on which
| > parameters are the canonical name and which are synonyms.
| > I submitted a bug with a patch to fix this by using smb.conf(5)
| > as the authorative reference and fixing loadparm.c to suit:
| > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1782
| > (If I've interpreted incorrectly and smb.conf(5) is the incorrect
| > source, then smb.conf(5) needs to be fixed, and loadparm.c still
| > needs the "protocol"/"max protocol" keywords fixed up).
| loadparm.c currently is the authorative source. Docbook XML files per each
| wrong parameter must be fixed. We were thinking on autogenerating parts of
| loadparm.c out of XML source sometime ago but nobody did that yet.
I think that for these particular parameters, loadparm.c should be
changed per smb.conf.5, because the "authorative" vs "synonym" names
used in smb.conf.5 seem more consistent with other options.
To recap, the changes I'm requesting (with patch) are:
a) rename the following options:
min passwd length min password length
timestamp logs debug timestamp
b) don't list both "protocol" and "max protocol" in "testparm -v"
(Patch at: https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=664 )
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20041028/8df7cfe8/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical