Usability of 'samba-tool domain provision'

Rowland Penny repenny241155 at
Wed May 11 11:14:29 UTC 2016

On 11/05/16 12:07, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Thursday, May 05, 2016 09:30:04 AM Rowland Penny wrote:
>> On 04/05/16 23:01, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 11:09 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
>>>> On 04/05/16 10:29, Peter C. Kelly wrote:
>>>>> Andreas said:
>>>>>> This documents issues I
>>>>>> found during provisioning. samba-tool is far away from being user
>>>>>> friendly.
>>>>>> a) It isn't clear what domain is from 'samba-tool domain provison
>>>>>> --help'
>>>>> I have raised bug 11894, and attached a patch which addresses this
>>>>> point as per Rowland's suggested wording.
>>>>>> b) The --realm option is essential but at the end of the help ...
>>>>> The reason that the realm is way down the bottom is that it is
>>>>> under a
>>>>> heading "Samba Common Options", along with configFile debuglevel
>>>>> and
>>>>> option.
>>>>> What is currently holding me up from developing the second trivial
>>>>> patch is a need for a bit more clarity on how this --help output
>>>>> should look.  It seems to me that if the --domain parameter is
>>>>> compulsory, then the heading text should say so,
>>>>> and that if a realm has to be specified (or read in from an
>>>>> existing
>>>>> conf file) then perhaps that should be mentioned in the
>>>>> introductory
>>>>> text as well.
>>>>> As I am a first time contributor I would be happy to make these
>>>>> trivial changes, if I can get further input on what changes are
>>>>> desirable.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Peter
>>>> Hi, I did some work on this and sent Andreas a new that
>>>> addressed all of the issues he raised, I am still awaiting a reply
>>>> from
>>>> Andreas (hint, hint)
>>> Rowland,
>>> Can you please post the patches to the mailing list?
>>> I'm planning on merging the trivial typos in the meantime, it makes no
>>> sense to block a new contributor while you look at the larger issues.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Andrew Bartlett
>> OK, here is the patch I am working on, it changes the provision command
>> somewhat, you can now only provision a DC, for instance.
>> It is a work in progress, I have not tested it fully yet.
> This looks already good. Could you split it into several smaller patches
> please?
> Thanks,
>    -- andreas

Probably, but in what respect ?
There will be a delay, I am struggling with knitted spaghetti at the 
moment :-)


More information about the samba-technical mailing list