Hi Samba Users, I forgot to send this mail to the samba ML, too.
The question is whether there are serious objections to replacing "idmap uid" and "idmap gid" by a new option "idmap range". Details below. Thanks - Michael ----- Forwarded message from Michael Adam <ob...@samba.org> ----- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:58:26 +0100 From: Michael Adam <ob...@samba.org> To: samba-techni...@lists.samba.org Subject: 3.6:idmap:Q1: add "idmap range" ? Hi List, I have recently rewritten the idmap code in winbindd to some extent. The code has been unified under the hood. And one thing I would really like to do would be to unify the two configuration options "idmap uid" and "idmap gid" into one option called "idmap range" for the sake of consistency of the default idmap config with the explicit domain configurations (idmap config DOMAIN : range = ...). Currently, the uid and gid range are expected to be identical anyways. The RID module errors out if they aren't and otherwise the intersection of both ranges is built. So de facto we do have one single range already. After discussing this with Volker and Jeremy, the procedure I have in mind is this: For 3.6, I would like to introduce "idmap range" in addition and mark "idmap uid" and "idmap gid" as deprecated. At the place where now the intersection of "idmap uid" and "idmap gid" is built, I would build the intersection of all three ranges (possibly with a warning). This way old and new configs would work without problems. In 3.7 or any other future major new version, I would then drop "idmap uid" and "idmap gid". Does that sound ok? Or are there any major concerns with this? I would really love to reach a stage where we have a sane id mapping system and configuration. :-) Cheers - Michael ----- End forwarded message -----
pgphB5Puekyyj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba