[Samba] Adding a machine; I think I am onto something
lrivera at racsa.co.cr
Sun Jan 19 10:44:00 GMT 2003
On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 02:35, Jim C wrote:
> > What's actually needed is full separation of the search for users and
> > computers, and that's not worth it (IMHO) in 2.2.7a if 3.0alpha has it
> > already (I believe it does). I'd rather contribute to 3.0alpha and help
> > get it out the door quicker than try to expand functionality on 2.2.7a.
> Certainly and I agree, however until 3.0 comes out of beta and gets the
> official stability nod I am stuck with 2.2.7a. Besides there has to be
> a way to get this going. I have to assume that the fact that I am the
> only one gripeing about it indicates that most others have it figured
> out and it therefore follows that it *can* be figured out. :-)
I also agree that it sucks that we're stuck with 2.2.7a for production
use and can't add stuff like this easily, but that's just how it is.
I also agree that others may have figured it out. However, I see two
1) Those who figured they could live with it as is, because making the
mods is much more trouble than it's worth to them, and adds
functionality not fully tested by the official team, and thus the
community support is hampered because of the (extensive, as I saw them
at least) modifications with respect to the original, tested codebase.
2) Those who chose to go ahead and implement it in their own way and can
live with not having as much support available as with the "stock" code
(even with light modifications).
The mods I made allowed specification of the branch where machine
accounts were kept, but as I said: I ran into a brick wall because
getpwent() gets used in several non-SAM-database related places to get
machine account info, and that is an issue. The solution is to have
ldap.conf search for "users" in several locations, but that may add
overhead that could cause problems - especially with OpenLDAP's reduced
performance when combined with Samba and high loads.
I may look into it again, but I don't think I'll find a solution to it
that doesn't require me modifying the code extensively.
HOWEVER: if you do choose to implement it, share the code and perhaps we
can come up with "2.2.8" including those mods. I'll definitely sign up
More information about the samba