>> I assume that the samba job has been split into two because there was >> a problem with nmbd not starting when smbd and nmbd were launched >> through samba. >> If you look at the respective conf files, you will see that nmbd >> requires a nic other than lo to be up before starting.
> So, although it makes sense that there is little reason to run nmbd when > the only network connection is lo, it makes even _less_ sense, AFAIK, to > run smbd when there are no external network connections. I couldn't > think of a single scenario where smbd does anything without networking > -- mounting local SMB file systems only requires mount.cifs, which is in > an entirely different package (smbfs). > Is one service/daemon per /etc/init .conf file part of the Upstart > design spec, perhaps? I would look at this from a different angle; smbd does not have nmbd's "deficiency" of requiring a non-loopback interface to be up and the developer chose to have the minimal "start on" test for smbd - and therefore created two upstart jobs. I don't think that Upstart prevented him from starting smbd and nmdb with the same job (with "script; exec smbd...; exec nmbd...; end script"). Having two jobs is definitely cleaner than the Karmic situation where there is a script in /etc/network/if-up.d to "bring nmbd up when an interface comes up, if smbd is already running." -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
