1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Re : Re: new samba-squid subpackage proporsal
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Re%20%3A%20Re%3A%20%20new%20samba-squid%20subpackage%20proporsal&In-Reply-To=%3C201108101213.15940.bgmilne%40staff.telkomsa.net%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="007279.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="007312.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] Re : Re: new samba-squid subpackage proporsal</H1>
<B>Buchan Milne</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Re%20%3A%20Re%3A%20%20new%20samba-squid%20subpackage%20proporsal&In-Reply-To=%3C201108101213.15940.bgmilne%40staff.telkomsa.net%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Re : Re: new samba-squid subpackage proporsal">bgmilne at staff.telkomsa.net
</A><BR>
<I>Wed Aug 10 12:13:13 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007279.html">[Mageia-dev] Re : Re: new samba-squid subpackage proporsal
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="007312.html">[Mageia-dev] new samba-squid subpackage proporsal
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#7313">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#7313">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#7313">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#7313">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>On Saturday, 6 August 2011 20:20:39 andre999 wrote:
><i> Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
</I>><i> > Le vendredi 5 août 2011 21:19:06, Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz a écrit :
</I>><i> >> Why condicional suggest?
</I>><i> >> All what i'm asking is ti do that subpackage and then i place
</I>><i> >> Suggests: samba-squid-helper
</I>><i> >> At squid's spec
</I>><i> >>
</I>><i> >> I don't get your point.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > I don't see either the need for a conditional suggest, what I understood
</I>><i> > is : samba-common would require samba-squid-helper
</I>><i> > squid would suggest samba-squid-helper
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > thus allowing squid to use the helpers without the need for the full
</I>><i> > samba- common package.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > Now, bgmilne seems to think that there's no need to split samba-common
</I>><i> > for that, for a reason that I haven't understood but maybe I don't know
</I>><i> > the subject enough to understand it.
</I>
My point is that splitting ntlm_auth out samba-common would make no
difference, as:
-ntlm_auth requires smb.conf, in samba-common
-ntlm_auth (at least for this scenario) requires samba-winbind, which requires
smb.conf, which is in samba-common
-/usr/bin/net is required (at least once) to join the domain, it is in samba-
common
><i> Exactly how I understand it, as well.
</I>><i> At 50M, samba-common isn't tiny.
</I>
Unfortunately, due to samba's migration to auto-generated code based on IDL
files, binaries have been growing substantially. It may be worthwhile to split
other less commonly used binaries out of samba-common.
But, the purpose samba-common serves, having binaries and configuration files
which are *required* by many different scenarios, should not be changed to fit
squid. We could migrate ntlm_auth out of samba-common, but whatever package it
is in would require samba-common anyway ...
><i> If there is reluctance to have a subpackage for squid alone, maybe a
</I>><i> subpackage which is a superset for all packages wanting approximately the
</I>><i> same components ?
</I>
Why specific to squid, when 3 packages in the distribution are commonly used
with ntlm_auth?
><i> Possibly making this subpackage parallel to samba-common, created from the
</I>><i> same srcrpm, with mutual declared conflicts, so the subpackage is only
</I>><i> installed if samba-common isn't, and that those installing samba-common
</I>><i> install a single package.
</I>
What is the cost/benefit of this?
><i> Both seem better options than an independant samba-squid-helper package,
</I>><i> which would require mutual conflicts with samba-common.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Just some random ideas ...
</I>
I would like to understand the motivation first. What are we trying to
achieve, besides more work for the samba maintainer?
If we are trying to reduce the disk footprint of a squid+ntlm_auth setup, the
best approach is to move some binaries out of samba-common.
Regards,
Buchan
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007279.html">[Mageia-dev] Re : Re: new samba-squid subpackage proporsal
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="007312.html">[Mageia-dev] new samba-squid subpackage proporsal
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#7313">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#7313">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#7313">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#7313">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
