Quoting Steve: > > I agree here. We should propose a patch to upstream as I don't see any > > reason to have a default to /var/run/samba/usershares > > <ahem> better make it part of the fhs patch submission then, since that's > ultimately where this comes from. :)
I don't understand the "comes from". Do you mean that our fhs.patch is responsible for the strange default directory for usershares. If it is, then we should correct it, for sure. > > usershare = yes > > usershare max shares = <integer> > > I'm not sure that we would want the share count to be unlimited by default > either, though? Well, picking a number would be tricky. One that's suitable for Joe might be completely incorrect for Barbara. > > > How about "sambashare" or "samba-share"? It does, after all, have little > > > to > > > do with the smb protocol, but everything to do with the samba package. > > > I have a small preference for "sambashare" while "cifsshare" seems > > more precise to me....but more cryptic for people who don't know what > > CIFS is. > > cifsshare would also be ok with me. While technically "cifsshare" is more precise, I think that "sambashare" is clearer for our users.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
