Building VFS modules out of tree

Richard Sharpe realrichardsharpe at
Mon Mar 31 11:43:27 MDT 2014

On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at> wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-03-30 at 19:26 -0700, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2014-03-30 at 16:48 -0700, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>> [Some stuff deleted]
>> >> The question then is, for those people who have their own VFS modules
>> >> and do not want to place them in the Samba source tree, how do they
>> >> build with waf? How to the gain access to all the configuration stuff
>> >> and so forth.
>> >
>> > I think you would have to patch them or at least the reference to them
>> > in a matching Samba source tree.
>> This is a very much less than ideal situation for many OEMs it seems to me.
>> Something that worked very well with Samba 3.5. and 3.6 is that OEMs
>> who only needed a VFS module or two could use RPMs or other packages
>> supplied by RedHat, Debian, SuSE, etc, and could then add their VFS
>> module as a separate RPM and could build their VFS module without
>> modifying the Samba source tree for the main package.
> How did they do that?  As I see it, they would have needed a built
> source tree to get the config.h file that was used, and the full source
> to get at the headers, because we have never published them as public
> headers.

You are correct. Samba is the most difficult open source package out
there. People using it routinely have to jump through about 40 hoops
and do one hundred back flips to use it. As such that makes my skills
worth a lot.

Yes, they typically had to build the RPM/package and leave the source
tree around, which inflates build times.

I am sure many people would love it if it was easier.

Richard Sharpe

More information about the samba-technical mailing list