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

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Tue Feb 26 21:17:35 GMT 2008

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 16:04 -0500, David Collier-Brown wrote:
> Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > 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.  
>   At the pure semantic level, calling this one "mark as hidden"
> disambiguates them somewhat...
>   The possible confusion is a concern to me, but it's similar to
> having a way to not serve files and also a way to mark 
> them "tell the client to hide this".

I actually think that (tell client to hide share) should be the option
name.  Anything else makes it sound like an inverse alias for

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/20080227/446de125/attachment.bin

More information about the samba-technical mailing list