Patch for VFS Example

[Richard Sharpe]

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Dustin Oprea <myselfasunder at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Richard Sharpe
> <realrichardsharpe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Dustin Oprea <myselfasunder at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > It looks like the "skel-opaque" VFS example needs to be fixed. I'm not
>> > sure
>> > how this function would've ever been called (
>> > ("init_samba_module", "samba_init_module", and "init_module" seem to be
>> > the
>> > only names that would've ever been acceptable), and the name-type
>> > literal
>> > implies that this example was just copied from the "transparent"
>> > example.
>>
>> There is some magic going on in an in-tree build ... however, the
>> magic might have lost its power in the face of Samba 4.x.
>>
>> > Original:
>> >
>> > NTSTATUS vfs_skel_transparent_init(void)
>> > {
>> >     return smb_register_vfs(SMB_VFS_INTERFACE_VERSION,
>> > "skel_transparent",
>> > &skel_transparent_fns);
>> > }
>> >
>> > Updated:
>> >
>> > NTSTATUS init_samba_module(void)
>> > {
>> >     return smb_register_vfs(SMB_VFS_INTERFACE_VERSION, "skel_opaque",
>> > &skel_transparent_fns);
>> > }
>> >
>> > This is probably obvious to anyone who has experience in building VFS
>> > modules, but not so much for those of us who'd like to do a simple
>> > example.
>> >
>> > Can I submit a patch?
>> >
>> > Also, the *http://www.samba.org/~sharpe/The-Samba-VFS.pdf
>> > <http://www.samba.org/~sharpe/The-Samba-VFS.pdf>* document seems to no
>> > longer be accurate in how to configure/build VFS modules. Can it be
>> > updated
>> > (I'd update it, but I don't see how I could), or is there a better
>> > alternative somewhere else?
>>
>> If you send me what you think are the corrections I will see if I can
>> find the time to verify them and update the document :-)
>
> I've attached a patch for the former.
>
> As for the latter (the doc fixes):
>
> - for the Git build, there is no longer a configure or configure.in in the
> source3/ directory.
> - for the package, the above applies, as well as the fact that there isn't a
> Makefile.in, either (which is required by the instructions).

Ahhh, sure. Samba 4 has moved to using waf ...

> Also, I wasn't interested in using my own source-tree (I just wanted to get
> something to build, to begin with, because it seems like it should be more
> straight-forward than any other route), but that section mentions
> autogen.sh, and none exists, in either the package or the Git tree.

Hmmm, some updating is needed ...

-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe
(何以解憂？唯有杜康。--曹操)