On ke, 13 huhti 2022, Simo Sorce wrote:
> The cockpit app in question knows nothing about that. It was
designed
> for a specific use case of a specific vendor solution. We are pushing
> it as an easy mechanism to manage Samba and NFS shares on a domain
> member or standalone Fedora workstation. However, installing package and
> using it has no artificial limits and that means sooner or later we'll
> see bug reports on 'Samba broke' or 'Cockpit app for Samba does not
> work'.
>
> I am not against an app in itself, what I am asking for is for it to
> behave as a good citizen in Fedora ecosystem. If maintainers cannot
> handle that, by contributing upstream or handling discussions with its
> upstream for adding such behavior, it would be a bit appalling and
> questionable why it should be present in Fedora.
The idea of having a separate config file was that the cockpit app
could then limit what is allowed to the only cases that work.
Ie it would not allow to create a domain controller it can't
successfully configure.
Of course it would conflict with an existing configured instance using
the regular configuration file, it means work on the cockpit app side
of course, that goes w/o saying.
I was merely offering a way to avoid clashes between cockpit and a
"proper" configuration, but there would still definitely be rough
edges.
I understand what you have proposed. I have pointed that it is not
possible because not everything can be overridden from such config and,
sadly, those bits are what common to all configurations. Content in
/var/lib/samba is what matters, not where config file is located.
--
/ Alexander Bokovoy