Subject: Hello list

From: Chip Mefford <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:32:12 -0500

It's been a few years since I was here last. 

Hope all have been well. 

I was dreaming the other night that someone other than
myself who -unlike myself- actually had talent wished
that a conf could be built that controlled both
samba and netatalk. 

I'm just guessing that a lot of folks who are running netatalk
are also running samba. Is there any work being done in this direction?
What I see out there is that the two projects are completely independent.

just asking

thanx in advance

---

From: Patrik Schindler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:50:52 +0100

>What I see out there is that the two projects are completely independent.

Yes, because they serve two absolutely different needs and even more different platforms.

The only thingie you may do is hacking a (perl, awk, whatever) script which reads a master configuration file, includes header-templates for smb.conf and AppleVolumes and then writes out both final configs.

I don't think this is easy to do because of the many different options one may choose for each samba and netatalk. It's better to let the configs alone. Or do you shuffle a dozen volumes/printers a day?

:wq! PoC

---

From: Jeff Thompson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:51:45 -0600

> What I see out there is that the two projects are completely independent.

I don't know how practical it is to write a seperate configuration tool
just for samba and netatalk when there are so many out there. None that
I know of do netatalk, but many of them are very modular, and in theory
it would not be too difficult to add a module to do netatalk
configurations. My favorite is webmin (http://www.webmin.com). Webmin is
a web-based configuration manager (written in perl). Unlike some GUI
config  tools (linuxconf), it generates clean, readable configuration
files. I does have samba support, but no netatalk.
Someday if I have some free time I'll look into writing a netatalk
module for it, because that would be a really handy thing to have.

-- 
-Jeff Thompson
[email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]

---

From: Harry Zink/Netatalk List <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 23:37:51 -0800

> Yes, because they serve two absolutely different needs and even more different

I think what he was mumbling about is that it would be nice to have a
configuration tool, similar to SAMBA's web-based tool, for netatalk - or one
that integrates the two together.

So far, the only tool I know that would be moderately easy to write for
would be Linuxconf, mostly because it is very flexible. Due to netatalk's
simple config files, this ought to be relatively easy (albeit still beyond
my abilities).

I for one do agree that a good configuration tool, web-based, would be a
boon.

Harry

---

From: anthony <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 09:50:53 -0500

> I don't think this is easy to do because of the many different options one may choose for each samba and netatalk. It's better to let the configs alone. Or do you shuffle a dozen volumes/printers a…

a very hearty agreement!

in my experience, samba takes a whole afternoon to get running smoothly
(importing users from NT) while netatalk took roughly 15 minutes
(including doing a search that led me to the anders HOWTO)

also, my needs for both platforms RARELY intersect. and AppleTalk and
the need for services such as netatalk are rapidly moving towards
obsolescence with the advent of MacOSx. Samba/smbclient on darwin,
anyone?

---

From: Patrik Schindler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:56:37 +0100

>obsolescence with the advent of MacOSx.

Which has no Server capabilities included, isn't it?

:wq! PoC

---

From: anthony <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 16:13:12 -0500

> Which has no Server capabilities included, isn't it?

well, it has ftp, NFS, and all the other benefits of being BSD. and it
will have AppleShareIP, if you insist on doing things the old-fashioned
way. :p you culd probably compile netatalk, if you wanted!