[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch v3-6-test updated

[simo]

On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 20:24 +0100, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> The branch, v3-6-test has been updated
>        via  7bc0737 Allow "security = share" with SMB2. We already handle this in smb2/smb2_server.c (cherry picked from commit de53c1e30ddbc640fd0755cf38a40e9e0acac309)
>       from  fd74ee5 pidl:Typelist: fix perl warnings about recursiv function calls
> 
> http://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=shortlog;h=v3-6-test
> 
> 
> - Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
> commit 7bc073743c9c9d892ab00ed236af3ab8c074e75d
> Author: Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>
> Date:   Wed Jan 26 10:50:44 2011 -0800
> 
>     Allow "security = share" with SMB2. We already handle this in smb2/smb2_server.c
>     (cherry picked from commit de53c1e30ddbc640fd0755cf38a40e9e0acac309)
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Summary of changes:
>  source3/smbd/process.c |    1 -
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> Changeset truncated at 500 lines:
> 
> diff --git a/source3/smbd/process.c b/source3/smbd/process.c
> index 4a93e7f..12ea28a 100644
> --- a/source3/smbd/process.c
> +++ b/source3/smbd/process.c
> @@ -2915,7 +2915,6 @@ void smbd_process(struct smbd_server_connection *sconn)
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	if (lp_maxprotocol() == PROTOCOL_SMB2 &&
> -	    lp_security() != SEC_SHARE &&
>  	    !lp_async_smb_echo_handler()) {
>  		/*
>  		 * We're not making the desion here,
> 
> 

Didn't we decide to *explicitly* disallow security = share on the new
protocol to finally get rid of it ?

It can't break anything because we never supported smb2 before, and
security = share is just ugly.
(and we should disallow security = server on smb2 too)

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>