Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: Samba for Cygwin
From: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <3B818182.9050106@ece.gatech.edu>
References: <20010820154601 DOT B1186 AT redhat DOT com>
	<3B816B6E DOT 9070107 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <033501c129b4$ef718190$0d76aec7 AT D4LHBR01>
	<20010820162521 DOT A4064 AT redhat DOT com> <037801c129ba$36e3a8f0$0d76aec7 AT D4LHBR01>
	<3B818182 DOT 9050106 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <998350597.5867.9.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.12 (Preview Release)
Date: 21 Aug 2001 09:52:33 +1000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2001 23:40:50.0045 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B068AD0:01C129D1]

On 20 Aug 2001 17:30:42 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Michael F. March wrote:
> 
> > Even if no one ever used SAMBA for Cygwin, the port would not
> > be in vain. I am certain that a SAMBA port would result in a 
> > more hardier Cygwin POSIX environment for future ports of other
> > apps that might experience the same porting issues if SAMBA was
> > not ported first.
> 
> 
> Sure, but why not expend that effort on a port that is USEFUL.  You'll 
> still end up "hardening" Cygwin's POSIX stuff, and in the end you'll 
> have a NEW ability, not a (slower) rehash of an EXISTING ability. 
> (worse, that slower rehash will claim to support certain features that 
> it really isn't capable of doing: "samba" implies a certain featureset, 
> but not all of those will be possible on cygwin.  The intersection of 
> the featureset of cygwin-samba and real-samba will change depending on 
> (Win95 / Win98 / WinMe / WinNT / Win2K / WinXP ) + ( FAT / FAT32 / 
> NTFS-NT4 / NTFS-NT5 ) + CYGWIN=(ntea / ntsec / smbntsec)

There is one valid use for at least part of SAMBA on cygwin - NTLMSSP
integration for squid. It is probably possible with pure win32 calls,
but as most/all of them are undocumented it would be a hard call. BTW:
This isn't hyopthetical, the current ntlmssp helper for squid-ntlm
(which uses a samba library) runs fine on win95 and up, as long as there
is a DC on the net somewhere for it to talk to. 

> > I, for one, look forward to a
> > SAMBA port.
> 
> 
> I do not.  Join me in my nightmare:
> 
...
> Or this:
> 
> "I just set up samba 2.2 as a PDC on my WinMe machine. It doesn't work"

This is a valid goal actually :}.

> 
> My solution for these and other problems: procmail any message 
> containing samba and cygwin to the bitbucket.

lol.
Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/