Confused about samba4 & s3fs

[Rowland Penny]

On 16/08/12 18:40, Gémes Géza wrote:
> 2012-08-16 19:22 keltezéssel, Rowland Penny írta:
>> On 16/08/12 15:10, Arvid Requate wrote:
>>> maybe I should have explained more clearly, that s3fs is a service of
>>> the samba process that avoids the need to start the smbd separately
>>> and provides all the internal wiring necessary to authenticate against
>>> the samba backend. AFAIK s3fs efetively runs the same codebase as
>>> smbd. So you have to differentiate between three thigs here: first the
>>> "old style" of running smbd as a separate process, second the
>>> improved convenience of "s3fs" that runs/forks mostly the same code
>>> automatically from the samba process itself. And finally the "NTvfs"
>>> fileserver code, which AFAIK is based on an initiative mainly of 
>>> Tridge to
>>> write a fileserver from scratch with an improved internal structure. 
>>> The
>>> NTvfs code is still in source4, but it is not the default (as of 
>>> beta1) as
>>> it is still in early stages of development and feature completeness as
>>> compared to the smbd/s3fs code.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>> Sorry I am still confused, I know that if you now start the samba4 
>> daemon you also get the smbd daemon, you can start the nmbd daemon to 
>> get network browsing. As far as I can see, all of this works, so I 
>> ask again, do I use s3fs so it can be tested or not?
>>
>> If testing is not required, why was all the effort put into adding 
>> s3fs to samba4?
>>
>> Rowland
>>
> No the services offered by nmbd in a Samba3 installation are offered 
> by the samba binary on a Samba4 install, s3fs means (in a simplified 
> manner) load the Samba3 smbd for serving files. The user facing 
> benefit of using s3fs instead of ntvfs is, that Samba3s smbd (and thus 
> s3fs) has received lots of improvements (like support for newer 
> smb/cifs dialects used by Vista/7) which didn't were ported to ntvfs.
>
> Regards
>
> Geza Gemes
>
>
Slightly less confused now, as far as I can see, this means that we 
should be running s3fs to serve files (i.e. the smbd daemon)  and the 
samba daemon takes care of authentication.

What I am confused about now is Geza's statement about nmbd, he seems to 
be saying that you can have the server browseable just by running the 
samba daemon, but I have to run the nmbd daemon for the server shares to 
be visible.

Rowland

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.