From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:34:53 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] samba: Add support for libnss_win*.so* installation In-Reply-To: <54730753.3030108@zacarias.com.ar> References: <1407176057-13180-1-git-send-email-benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com> <1407176057-13180-2-git-send-email-benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com> <20141122213359.2628a10e@free-electrons.com> <54730753.3030108@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <20141124203453.59c5f279@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 07:24:19 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > > I must say I'm a bit skeptical about two things (about which probably > > Beno?t can give some details) : > > > > * The usefulness of enabling the NSS libraries in non-glibc > > environments. Even though I agree that technically, nothing prevents > > some program from using them, in practice, the NSS libraries are > > basically only used by the glibc name resolution logic. So I would > > personally prefer to make those NSS libraries visible only in glibc > > configurations. > > Even if they can be built they really are intended for (e)glibc so we agree. > If you need to access/use wbclient functionality you could just use the > wbclient (winbind) api by enabling samba install to staging, that's the > public way of accessing it. Agreed. > > * The fact that the winbindd daemon is not actually needed on the > > target to get libnss_wins/libnss_winbind working. My understanding > > is that winbindd is a daemon that will answer to the name resolution > > requests of libnss_wins/libnss_winbind, so I don't see how they can > > work without the daemon running. > > AFAIK you need winbind running in order to use libwbclient and/or > libnss_winbind/wins. I think libnss_wins has a fallback to DNS-only mode > but it's probably not very useful. Ok. Beno?t, can you rework your patches to take into account those comments? > Also please note that Samba 3 is very likely going EOL as soon as Samba > 4.2.x is released which even though delayed a bit in the RC phase is > coming along pretty soon, so adding feature to the samba3 package isn't > very wise IMHO (it's in security-only fixes now). > See: https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Release_Planning Ok. Still there's some chance that we will keep Samba 3 around for a bit of time, just like we still have libgtk2 available. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com