[Samba] Fwd: Symlink with mklink

[Marc JIROU]

2015-12-02 18:10 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>:

> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 06:07:37PM +0100, Ralph Boehme wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 08:39:27AM -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 02:30:00PM +0100, Marc JIROU wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So no one is interesting in having symbolic link on a samba server ?
> > > >
> > > > When i was looking for informations, most of people think that
> symbolic
> > > > link are
> > > > reserved to NTFS and can't  exists on a smb server, that why no one
> ask for.
> > > >
> > > > I'm pretty sure a lot of people are waiting for this ( at least
> people that
> > > > use unix system )
> > > > but that's just my personnal opinion
> > >
> > > Well people use symlinks on Samba servers all the time.
> > > But they create and manage them on the UNIX side and
> > > the Windows clients are unaware of them.
> > >
> > > What advantage does having the clients aware of the
> > > link bring ?
> >
> > POSIX clients, eg OS X loves symlinks.
>
> Well yes, but we already have the infrastructure
> for that (along with all the security protections
> that took a while to get right).
>
> Adding Windows client-aware symlink means the same
> level of detail needed for a feature that is disabled
> by default on Windows and most people are unaware of.
>
> I'm not saying we shouldn't do it - just we need to
> be aware of who needs it and the trade-offs.
>
> If a customer pays to have it done I'd be happy to
> add it, but we have a lot of other features I think
> have higher priority for expanding Samba use right
> now (hyperV handle support for example).
>

I don't think it a so small feature.
Imagine what will happend if you remove it from nfs ?

I have to admit that it is certainly less fanzy than other features,
but it shoud be in the basic survival kit ...

Regards,
Marc