Fw: samba-tool command structure

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at samba.org
Thu Sep 1 10:31:29 MDT 2011

Hi Giampaolo,

On 26/08/11 19:39, Giampaolo Lauria wrote:
> 2) In general, I think it is easier to find things that are grouped by
> category. It would also be nice to have a single object (diag in our case)
> as a single entry for the administrator to validate different
> configuration settings.
> I think testparm belongs to a diag-like command.
> After looking at the "testparm" code in more details, I noticed that it
> does nothing more than validating the values for each keyword in the
> config file. The fact that it allows the user to specify a section or a
> keyword, is just to simply dump that section or keyword after validating
> all the keyword values anyway. Unless I am missing something, I am not
> sure how useful the keyword value(s) dump can be or whether it is a bug in
> the command.
> I am not crazy about the diag naming myself but could not come up with
> anything better for the time being. Please feel free to suggest a better
> name.
I think we should consider more than just regrouping these commands, but 
changing them a bit as well.

testparm currently does two things:

  * it can be used to access (and in the future, perhaps manipulate) the 
configuration file.
  * it runs a few basic checks to see if the configuration file is 

dbcheck checks that the database is consistent and has valid data.

Perhaps we can split it up like this:

  * a subcommand for accessing and manipulating smb.conf, perhaps 
"samba-tool config ..." ?
  * a subcommand for verifying your setup (both database and 
configuration), perhaps "samba-tool check" ?

$ samba-tool config get "netbios name"
$ samba-tool check
Domain name MYDOMAIN in configuration file is not present in database
$ samba-tool check --db-only


What do you think?

> 3) While keytab is a concept that exists outside of Samba, my
> understanding is that the exportkeytab in Samba4 is strictly referring to
> a keytab from an AD domain. I've referenced to this link:
> http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Keytab_Extraction
> Regarding the vampire command, here is a comment from Andrew Bartlett:
> "'samba-tool domain vampire' is just a special case of 'samba-tool domain
> join', using a different codebase.  it should be an option for
> developers (--old-vampire-code or such) not a top level command), as it
> is no longer the preferred code."
> Being only a special case of "join", then maybe it is a domain subcommand.
> Otherwise, we would have to move the "join" command as well.
Vampire originally was a way to suck everything out of a remote machine 
in order to be able to replace it. While that is in some ways pretty 
similar to joining a domain, I think it is quite different (you can't 
"join" a standalone machine). I'm not at all familiar with the current 
code though, so perhaps it's not (any longer?) as generic as I was hoping.



More information about the samba-technical mailing list