I've got a couple, for example I cooked an RDMA-only one which I'm using for testing that ignores regular adapters and therefore can coexist with Samba. Only takes a few lines. Now, if the Ubuntu package manager wouldn't prevent me from installing both Samba and ksmbd-tools, it would be easier to deploy. :( Sep 1, 2022 6:26:17 PM Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx>: > I do think that one obvious thing that is missing is a simple python > script or slightly more complex GUI tool that would allow better > autoconfiguring a share for ksmbd without having to understand the > ksmbd.conf/smb.conf format (and a different tool for Samba - although > to be fair for Samba various vendors and some distros have tools to do > this), but in the short term, a few more example smb.conf/ksmbd.conf > files might help (maybe in the wiki?) > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 1:52 PM Tom Talpey <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 9/1/2022 2:30 PM, Jeremy Allison wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 08:41:08PM +0300, atheik wrote: >>>> On Thu, 1 Sep 2022 09:14:31 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 09:06:07AM -0400, Tom Talpey wrote: >>>>>> … >>>>> >>>>> +1 from me. Having 2 conflicting file contents both wanting >>>>> to be called smb.conf is a disaster waiting to happen. >>>> >>>> ksmbd-tools clearly has a goal of being compatible with smb.conf(5) of >>>> Samba when it comes to the common subset of functionality they share. >>>> ksmbd-tools has 7 global parameters that Samba does not have, but other >>>> than, share parameters and global parameters of ksmbd-tools are subset >>>> of those in Samba. Samba and ksmbd-tools do not have any conflicting >>>> file locations. The smb.conf(5ksmbd) man page of ksmbd-tools does not >>>> collide with and never overshadows smb.conf(5) of Samba. Please, help >>>> me understand what sort of disaster this could lead to. >>> >>> Samba adds and or changes functionality in smb.conf all >>> the time, without coordination with ksmbd. If you call >>> your config file smb.conf then we would have to coordinate >>> with you before any changes. >> >> And vice-versa. For example, ksmbd supports RDMA and can be >> configured to use interfaces with kernel-internal names, >> for example "enp2s0" or "mlx5/1". These files do not in fact >> subset one another, in either direction. >> >>> Over time, the meaning/use/names of parameters will drift >>> apart leading to possible conflicts. >> >> Personally I think they're already in conflict, having taken >> several days to work them all out wile setting up my new >> machines. And, um, I think I know what I'm doing. Heaven >> help the newbie. >> >>> Plus it leads to massive user confusion (am I running >>> smbd or ksmbd ? How do I tell ? etc.). >> >> +1 >> >> Tom. >> >>> It is simple hygene to keep these names separate. >>> >>> Please do so. >>> > > > > -- > Thanks, > > Steve
