Some deficiencies with the Samba VFS that I think need to e rectified ...
realrichardsharpe at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 15:33:52 MST 2013
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Volker Lendecke
<Volker.Lendecke at sernet.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:39:21AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>> I agree pretty much with these needs. However, one of the things that
>> is motivating my grumbling is that we are making too many changes to
>> Samba, which makes life difficult for us down the road.
> Can you share more of your requirements and the details of
> what you are doing? In the other mail today you wrote about
> findings with regards to previous versions. Do your VFS
> change requests have anything to do with that? I'm asking
> because maybe someone on this list has good ideas how to
> meet your requirements. If you need to develop in private,
> then fine too.
Well, it does and it doesn't.
1. We want to introduce fake directories for a couple of reasons. One
of those was to support things like ~snapshot, although that is going
to go away. A nice way to do this is to bury it in our VFS module but
it is quite hard. If we had and FSP associated with each dptr (or
whatever) then we could hang an FSP extension off it so we could keep
2. We are stitching together directories on different systems
separated by a WAN and need access to things like ACCESS_MASK and
SHARE_MODE in functions like SMB_VFS_MKDIR and some others but it is
not currently available, which constrains us mightily.
If more information was exposed during most VFS calls like would be easier.
In general I am hoping that we can support interesting things in Samba
to ensure that others don't do likewise :-)
More information about the samba-technical