From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustavo Zacarias Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 07:24:19 -0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] samba: Add support for libnss_win*.so* installation In-Reply-To: <20141122213359.2628a10e@free-electrons.com> 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> Message-ID: <54730753.3030108@zacarias.com.ar> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 11/22/2014 05:33 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello Gustavo, > > Could you have a look at the below patch? It would be useful to have > some review from a person knowing Samba better than I do. Hi, let's see. > 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. > * 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. 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 Regards.