vfs_fruit: Time Machine/FULLSYNC: add mDNS/DNS-SD advertisement

Omri Mor omri50 at gmail.com
Wed Jul 19 08:53:50 UTC 2017

> On Jul 19, 2017, at 01:02, Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:19:15AM +0200, Ralph Böhme wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 07:52:17AM +0200, Ralph Böhme via samba-technical wrote:
>>> Do we have something like a traverse over smb.conf (sections)? That would do the
>>> trick I guess.
>> smbconf_get_config() and then smbconf_get_parameter() looks promising.
> That will only partially catch it. There can be includes that are
> client- or user-dependent that this wont catch.
> Volker

> On Jul 19, 2017, at 01:01, Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:03:05AM +0200, Ralph Böhme wrote:
>> sure. But from a design perspective, clients will connect to TM shares *after*
>> seeing the service registrations.
> Yes, that's why I'm voting for a longer-term cache to make sure we
> find them all. We'll not reliably able to traverse all share
> definitions. Mind the % include macros.
> Volker

I don’t think that the particularly tricky cases (such as the client- and user-dependent shares or those using % macros) need to be advertised. Those are deliberately opting to use shares that are only defined when specific clients or users connect, and therefore cannot (and perhaps should not) be advertised.
For most cases we really only need to worry about statically defined shares.

Does it make more sense to use loadparam (libsamba-hostconfig)? I’m really not sure of the differences between it and smbconf.
My cursory look makes it appear that smbconf is more about parsing and modifying the configuration file itself, while loadparam is about accessing configuration settings, which seems to be more suited for what we’d need.


More information about the samba-technical mailing list