A module init function by any other name would not smell as sweet ...
jelmer at samba.org
Mon Dec 26 14:36:22 MST 2011
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.
More information about the samba-technical