smbd/source3 or ntvfs/source4 for new VFS module development?

[Jeremy Allison]

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:46:31PM -0800, Zack M. Davis wrote:
> Dear list,
> 
> When developing a new VFS module, does it still make sense to put it in
> source3/modules/vfs in the source repository and use the `smb_register_vfs`
> API as illustrated in examples/VFS/skel_*.c? Or is it preferrable to use
> the source4/ntvfs infastructure (which is newer, but ominously described as
> "to a large extent [...] deprecated in terms of use for file shares" at
> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba/Status#Feature_Status_on_the_AD_DC)?

source4/ntvfs is dead. It's legacy code, that will eventually be
removed.

> If the latter, is there any developer documentation on how to use the
> source4/ntvfs code? (I found it pretty straightfoward to make a simple
> proof-of-concept VFS module by modifying examples/VFS/skel_transparent.c
> and consulting
> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/The_new_version_of_Writing_a_Samba_VFS,

Yep, that's the right way to go. Copy examples/VFS/skel_transparent.c
and modify what you need from there.

If you find things that need changing to do what you want to do,
let us know and we'll either help you come up with a way to do what you
need or we'll work out how to change the VFS to accommodate you.

Cheers,

	Jeremy.