Printing and smbd -i

David Disseldorp ddiss at
Thu Jun 30 07:09:37 MDT 2011

Hi Simo,

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:45:12 -0400
simo <idra at> wrote:

> One of the goals we have for the printing subsystem is to be able to
> completely disable it (to the point of not even compiling it in in order
> to further reduce size of binaries for embedded devices).

Sounds like a great improvement.

> One of the final steps is to move some of the stuff that should have
> been done in the background queue process but were recently put into the
> main smbd process instead by David Disseldorp.

As mentioned on IRC, prior to the recent printer_list tdb changes the
printcap cache was stored in memory. Updates in the main smbd process
ensured new client connections saw up-to-date printer lists. Anyhow
I agree, with printer_list tdb changes in 3.6 this belongs in the
background queue process.

> I think the goal of making the printing susbsystem more independent and
> pluggable is more important, so I would like to know if always forking
> the background queue process even when the -i switch is provide is a
> good enough compromise. Same fate for spoolssd, if you configured it to
> be used it would be forked even in the smbd -i case.

I don't have a problem with this. That said, I only use interactive mode
for gdb and valgrind sessions.

Cheers, David

More information about the samba-technical mailing list