Samba is only the available CIFS server in Solaris 10. Solaris 10 is
production system.
Please do not concentrate only on the particular solutions. In scope of
this case is support of off-line files also on production system.
Jiri
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> Alan.M.Wright wrote:
>>> Providing this as a temporary solution to relieve a customer problem
>>> is excellent. My disagreement is that it should be committed as a
>>> long term solution for offline support when we already have a defined
>>> system attribute mechanism that could be used to solve the problem
>>> via libc.
>>
>> Given the above I'm derailing this case for the purpose of writing an
>> opinion with Advice to fund the above mentioned project and to point
>> out the issue of adding Solaris/Sun functionality to Samba with no
>> planned match for the in kernel CIFS server.
>>
>> PSARC members please are you willing to vote based on the above our
>> would you like to see draft opinion text first. I've marked the case
>> as "waiting need vote" for now.
>>
>> Note that this is *derail* not *deny* (though depending on the vote it
>> could be but I doubt it).
>>
> I was the original +1. I would normally have thought to vote to
> approve, but given the recent discussion, I'm not sure I am ready.
> Since this solution to the problem is temporary, and since binary relief
> is already available to the customer, I am inclined to vote to deny this
> project until they have a solution that works with both kernel CIFS and
> Samba.
>
> On a higher level, as yet another case where we have redundant
> functionality in two (or more) different systems, it seems like someone
> (PAC) ought to start funding an effort to consider reducing the
> complexity of the system by also reducing the number of duplicated
> subsystems. (Do we need both of these SMB servers? Do we need a bunch
> of different web servers? Do we need both cups and lpsched? Then the
> array of various different packet interception and filtering mechanisms
> in our stack boggles the mind... at what point does the fact that we
> have so much choice actually become a liability to our customers rather
> than a benefit? Its *clear* to me that it is already a liability in the
> cost to Sun engineering....
>
> -- Garrett
>
--
Jiri (dot) Sasek (at) Sun (dot) COM
----------------------------------------------------------------
The first 90% of the job
takes 90% of the time.
The remaining 10%
of the job requires
another 90% of the time.
-Unknown (but oh so true)
