Meaning of NULL share names in registry?

[Jeremy Allison]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:03:35AM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:49:03AM +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> > I originally intended to allow more registry keys to contain
> > config data and allow for configuration to be distributed across
> > these several sources with dynamic includes, similar to what we
> > are doing with files. That was the motivation allowing these
> > 'dangling' parameters: have a possibly dynamic include of a
> > registry key that adds parameters to whatever section is
> > currently open.
> 
> From my POV one of the benefits of the registry config is that we've been
> able to start fresh and thus restrict it much more than the historically
> grown smb.conf include/substitute hell. The main uses of the registry
> config I've seen so far are command-driven (net conf) and cluster-wide
> applications with a strict feature set. So I would like to see this
> feature go and leave the registry config as strict as it is right now.

+1 to this. The amount of time and effort spent fixing up
old smb.conf combinations is something I'd hate to see
repeated in a new config mechanism.