[Samba] Books of Samba 4
tony at tndh.net
Wed Mar 5 17:25:25 MST 2014
Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 05/03/14 21:36, Gregory Sloop wrote:
> > ---MASSIVE SNIP---
> > P> This is the last that I will say on this subject.
> > RP> Yes, samba4 was started out as a totally separate entity, but they
> > RP> folded samba3 into samba4 to get the fileserver components etc.
> > RP> You can set up samba 4 as either an AD DC, OR as anything a samba
> > RP> 3.6 could do, it all depends on how you set it up.
> > RP> Yes, samba 3 will come to end of life sometime around end of
> > RP> August, but it will live on in samba 4.
Your responses waffle between 'it is architecturally split' and 'it is a
unified system'. In any case that doesn't matter because the architecture of
the backend daemon is irrelevant to entirely separate process of creating
the single .conf file that any approach is reading.
> > RP> If you want to get help, then I suggest you calm down, stop
> > RP> complaining about what samba cannot do yet and concentrate on what
> > RP> samba can do. If you stop and think about it, it is amazing just
> > RP> what the samba devs have managed to do so far and it just keeps
> getting better.
I have never complained about what samba cannot do. I agree it is a very
valuable collection of work. The issues I have are with the state of the
documentation, and the lack of someone taking what appears to be an
inconsequential amount of time to have the one item 'samba-tool' emit a
clone of the wiki text for the role=member situation. If samba 3 is really
going to be dead in August, then someone will need to fix this before then,
because lots of people will be guided into using saba-tool as THE approach
for configuring samba 4 by all kinds of blogs, and all the role=member
instances will stumble over this. As a project management issue, it would
appear to make sense to get that done ASAP so there is time to shake out any
issues before the real uptake in samba 4 migrations start. Then again, if
the goal is a busy mail list, not fixing it will assure lots of questions.
> > RP> Rowland
> > I have to say, having been a poster, offering occasional help, and as
> > someone following along on the list for more than a year...
> > I've seen Steve, Marc, and Rowland, Andrew and many others offer a lot
> > of help. Marc Steve and Rowland do it out of the goodness of their
> > hearts and I see they must spend a LOT of time doing so.
> > To take such a strident tone when they offer help and/or opinion
> > really seems both counter-productive and offensive.
> > I've read this thread over the last few days and if *I* were the one
> > responding, it would have gotten PLONK'ed a LONG time ago. I don't
> > have free time to dole out to people who want to bite the hand that
> > feeds them.
> > IMO, the tolerance for what seems like whining, at least to me, has
> > been pretty forbearing.
I don't believe I have been whining. If anything you are hearing a
frustration from what appears to be a lack of listening to what was said,
then just sending a canned response that 'if I only understood how the code
is architected I would know not to ask the question to begin with'. The
point of documentation is to avoid the need for everyone to "read the source
and figure it out". With the current inconsistent state of the
documentation, reading the source might be faster.
I understand completely how maintaining documentation during a version
transition can be a lot of work. I also understand that more eyes looking at
it with different perspectives will find more issues. If anything, consider
my voice to be on behalf of those who don't even bother to send in comments
when they can't find what they need, then turn to google in hopes they will
stumble across an answer that seems to solve their current issue.
> > Just my two little cents.
> > -Greg
> I did say that I wouldn't post again on this, but I did an internet search
> guy and found this:
> If this is the guy who is posting, then heaven help ipv6 in the USA, he
> even set up samba ;-) ;-)
Yes that is me. As I said in the part that was snipped off, I did have the
samba 4 member server working and sharing files for AD accounts before I
joined the mail list (though it did take a fair amount of outside-the-wiki
research before I got there). I also have several other NT4-style
stand-alone servers, including one that is acting as an IPv6 proxy to an
IPv4-only nas appliance. The only reason I posted was to find out if there
was something to stop the log file spew other than:
load printers = no
printing = bsd
printcap name = /dev/null
disable spoolss = yes
that I had found in random email, because there is nothing on the wiki, and
those statements are not working (looks like I will have to install cups
just to get it to shut up). I probably should have just unsubscribed as soon
as I got a 'that works here' response, but thought I could do a little to
contribute to the effort by pointing out how the wiki looks to someone that
doesn't do this on a daily basis. Clearly some here would rather be the
center of attention as Q/A responders than fix the documentation for those
inclined toward self-help.
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
More information about the samba