s4-param: +foo syntax
abartlet at samba.org
Thu Dec 9 15:30:02 MST 2010
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 23:13 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 11:14 +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> > > > Wouldn't it be clearer to use 'server services += openchange'?
> > >
> > > we discussed that, but were concerned about moving away from standard
> > > .ini file syntax in case other parsers/editors are used.
> This change already moves us away from the standard syntax. Existing
> parsers/editors will get the value wrong (silently), rather than
That is an understandable concern. That said, testparm reports the
correct, expanded value, if you use that.
Editors should I think show the + and - syntax, as these are the values
we want our users to manipulate. I don't see anything wrong or harmful
> > > > '+' might be a valid character in the list items.
> > >
> > > note that we created two types of lists, P_LIST and P_CMDLIST. P_LIST
> > > is only used for things where + and - makes sense.
> This is confusing, as users will try to use it on some of the other
> parameters as well and find that it does not work.
> += is also commonly used in other places to mean "extend with", so it
> would be less confusing.
The simple problem is this: Doing so would involve rewriting much of
the parsing code, and not provide a solution that can operate with the
registry backend in Samba3, when we eventually merge.
In short, our whole smb.conf handling is based around name=value pairs,
where the separator is removed very early in the parsing, if it is
provided at all.
Therefore, I don't think += is a viable option.
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the samba-technical