[PATCH] Add variable to define if a share should be hidden.

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Tue Feb 26 20:53:47 GMT 2008

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:51 -0500, David Collier-Brown wrote:
> A janitorial question: are not the variables the opposites
> of each other, so browseable = no means the same as hidden = yes?
>   If so, and if someone created a share called "foo$", then we
> could set the variable by default, and report it in testparm
> as whichever of browseable = no or hidden = yes makes sense.
>   Otherwise we risk creating two disjoint variables with 
> overlapping semantics, which will look bizzare to anyone
> trying to figure out which to use... and they they'll get it
> wrong!

I still think that having an option for 'actually hide this' and another
for 'tell the client to hide this' is asking for trouble.  

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20080227/b5ca635d/attachment.bin

More information about the samba-technical mailing list