A module init function by any other name would not smell as sweet ...

[Jelmer Vernooij]

Hi Richard,

Am 26/12/11 18:08, schrieb Richard Sharpe:
> It seems that if you build your VFS module out of the tree, or if you
> do not add your module to default_shared_modules in configure.in, then
> you must call your module init function samba_init_module ...

>
> This would seem to be one more hurdle for those writing their own VFS modules.
In what way is this a problem? I think it's reasonably well documented, 
and it doesn't seem like a hard thing to do.

The alternative would be to use the same name that's used elsewhere, but 
that would then have consequences for what you can call the shared 
library - renaming it would break it.

The reason we have the "samba_init_module" named functions is because 
the original VFS modules could only be shared and had to have a symbol 
with a specific name. When I added support for static modules, I had to 
allow different modules to provide a differnet symbol - because 
compiling them into the same binary would cause name clashes otherwise.

Cheers,

Jelmer