idra at samba.org
Wed Nov 22 00:20:14 GMT 2006
On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 22:56 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 04:51:40PM -0500, simo wrote:
> > Volker I did some work in samba4 to put share definitions on an ldb
> > database. I think makling shares accessible vie the registry is a very
> > interesting idea, what about discussing this development a bit and maybe
> > come to agree to something that can implemented in both tree in a
> > compatible way (from the user interface pov at least) ?
> I think the user interface is quite simple IMO. We have a
> registry key per share and the params are represented by the
> individual values. Two things to talk about:
> Where do we put it in the registry? The path proposed is
> just that: A quick proposal.
I think this is the least important, you could even have a parameter in
smb.conf that determines it.
> How do we cope with the data types? For example "valid
> users" would be a perfect fit for REG_SZ_MULTI, "force
> create mode" is more of the numeric type. Right now I assume
> everything as a string, but this is what I mean by "rough".
This is the problem, as we are going to change the interface with a
completely different thing why keeping the old way of doing things, we
know we have some things we should improve, and this may be a good time
For example valid users is basically a list of SIDs internally (anybody
said ACL ?) are you going to keep that as a list of names?
> Apart from that, the registry data modes is just a perfect
> match for the smb.conf shares.
a good enough directory model, but we may as well want to expose data
via other directory models.
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer
email: idra at samba.org
More information about the samba-technical