[PATCH] Shared samba build

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at vernstok.nl
Wed Oct 26 18:00:54 GMT 2005

Hash: SHA1

Michael Sweet wrote:

> Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>> Michael Sweet wrote:
>>> Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>>>> ... seperate as well, for example, we could have:
>>>> - - libsmbclient (basically libcli) - - libmsrpc - -
>>>> libtalloc - - libldb - - libtdb - - libnet - - libcom - -
>>>> libsocket_wrapper - - libregistry
>>> May I humbly suggest that you prefix all library named with
>>> "smb", e.g. libsmbmsrpc, libsmbtalloc, etc. to avoid
>>> "polluting" the global library namespace?
>> Sure. I'd agree with that for some, but not all, of those. It'd
>> make sense for 'libcom', 'libregistry' and 'libnet' but not for
>> the others IMHO. 'ldb', 'talloc' and 'tdb' are general purpose
>> and are used by projects other then Samba. 'msrpc' already has
>> the prefix 'ms'.
> IMHO, if those libraries are not distributed separately then they
> should have the "smb" prefix, particularly if other projects (I'm
> thinking WINE here, but others might also use SAMBA code) are
> already shipping their own versions...

There's really nothing Samba-ish or CIFS-related about the ones I
would like to leave without prefix other then the fact that they come
from the Samba source package. They can be (and are) used for things
unrelated to Samba. Samba's copy of these libraries is the original
(official) version. The only libraries that would fall into this
category currently are tdb (trivial database, multi-writers/readers,
e.g. more advanced version of gdbm), ldb (embedded LDAP database),
talloc (advanced memory management). None of them depends on
protocol-related code.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the samba-technical mailing list