samba - Mar 2016 - The sad state of samba 4 adaption for home/small business routers.

Reindl Harald <h.reindl <at> thelounge.net> writes:

>bloatware means unsecure, uncomfortable webinterfaces with limited 
>functionality compared what iptables alone offers you with some knowledge
> all that embedded crap is for people which needs handholding and have 
> fun to own a dozen of halfbaken devices instead just one real box
It seems you still have some misconception on what openWRT actually is and
can or can't do. You also quite underestimate what modern arm based embedded
devices can do.

I get it that you are happy and comfortable building/configuring your own
boxes by hand. In the meantime 99% of the normal home/sbu are not and hence
projects like openwrt/dd-wrt/tomato/buildroot try to bring some of your hand
crafted "magic" to the masses.

Also keep in mind that samba3.6 was successfully adopted on any device that
had a usb2.0 port in the past. So slapping a usbstick/sdcard/hdd on a cheap
router is already a common scenario.

bye
Andy

On 12/03/16 11:16, Andy Walsh wrote:
> Reindl Harald <h.reindl <at> thelounge.net> writes:
>
>
>> bloatware means unsecure, uncomfortable webinterfaces with limited
>> functionality compared what iptables alone offers you with some
knowledge
>> all that embedded crap is for people which needs handholding and have
>> fun to own a dozen of halfbaken devices instead just one real box
> It seems you still have some misconception on what openWRT actually is and
> can or can't do. You also quite underestimate what modern arm based
embedded
> devices can do.
>
> I get it that you are happy and comfortable building/configuring your own
> boxes by hand. In the meantime 99% of the normal home/sbu are not and hence
> projects like openwrt/dd-wrt/tomato/buildroot try to bring some of your
hand
> crafted "magic" to the masses.
I do not understand your reasoning here, surely if anybody is not happy 
building their own boxes, then they probably won't be happy taking a 
working router and installing another operating system on it.
>
> Also keep in mind that samba3.6 was successfully adopted on any device that
> had a usb2.0 port in the past. So slapping a usbstick/sdcard/hdd on a cheap
> router is already a common scenario.
Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no doubt, 
in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as how 
3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.

Rowland
> bye
> Andy
>
>

El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit:
> Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no doubt,
> in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as how
> 3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.
You'd be surprised to see what old shi^H^H^H "carefully crafted with 
backported fixes packages" router vendors put in their products.
In a sense I'm glad they do, since due to a samba misconfiguration on 
their part I could unlock a heavily locked router ;-)

Bye
-- 
Luca Olivetti
Wetron Automation Technology http://www.wetron.es/
Tel. +34 93 5883004 (Ext.3010)  Fax +34 93 5883007

Am 12.03.2016 um 12:16 schrieb Andy Walsh:
> Reindl Harald <h.reindl <at> thelounge.net> writes:
>
>> bloatware means unsecure, uncomfortable webinterfaces with limited
>> functionality compared what iptables alone offers you with some
knowledge
>
>> all that embedded crap is for people which needs handholding and have
>> fun to own a dozen of halfbaken devices instead just one real box
>
> It seems you still have some misconception on what openWRT actually is and
> can or can't do. You also quite underestimate what modern arm based
embedded
> devices can do.
>
> I get it that you are happy and comfortable building/configuring your own
> boxes by hand. In the meantime 99% of the normal home/sbu are not and hence
> projects like openwrt/dd-wrt/tomato/buildroot try to bring some of your
hand
> crafted "magic" to the masses
no, it's not for the masses, for the masses is what comes out-of-the-box

there is not much difference between replace the operating system on a 
mass-product and just setup my own box from-scratch in the end

i know what modern arm based devices can do

the HP microserver comes with a 
http://ark.intel.com/de/products/65735/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1220L-v2-3M-Cache-2_30-GHz
which has a TDP of 17W, 2.3 GHz x86_64 with AES-NI and turbo with 3.5 
GHz will blow away any embedded device and so finally that machine can 
do so much more in one box with horsepower, intergated large and fast 
storage and you only need to decide if you use the PCI-Express Port for 
a 4-Port-Switch or as WLAN-AP while you most likely can chose the 
4-Port-NIC which gives you combined with the interated Dual-Port finally 
a 5-Port-Switch with a WAN-Interface and theres surely some 
USB3-WLAN-Adapter on the market with is capable to run a 
WLAN-Accesspoint with "hostapd"

the operating system lives on a micro sd-card and with 8 GB RAM and 4 
hard-drive bayes you can do a lot of things with that box

not to forget with 5 Ethernet cards that you can build up different 
brdiges/routings and if you need 10 Gigabit, well, place a 10 Gigabit 
4-Port-Card in the Slot and use the interal Gigabit NIC for the WAN

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/attachments/20160312/a906df2a/signature.sig>

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:16:36AM +0000, Andy Walsh
wrote:
> 
> Also keep in mind that samba3.6 was successfully adopted on any device that
> had a usb2.0 port in the past. So slapping a usbstick/sdcard/hdd on a cheap
> router is already a common scenario.
Yes, and I'd like to help you do the same for Samba4.x also.

Stop moaning about it, and start helping *do* it :-).

Reindl Harald <h.reindl <at> thelounge.net> writes:
> no, it's not for the masses, for the masses is what comes
out-of-the-box
> 
> there is not much difference between replace the operating system on a 
> mass-product and just setup my own box from-scratch in the end
> i know what modern arm based devices can do
> 
> the HP microserver comes with a 
>
http://ark.intel.com/de/products/65735/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1220L-v2-3M-Cache-2_30-GHz
> which has a TDP of 17W, 2.3 GHz x86_64 with AES-NI and turbo with 3.5 
> GHz will blow away any embedded device and so finally that machine can 
> do so much more in one box with horsepower, intergated large and fast 
> storage and you only need to decide if you use the PCI-Express Port for 
> a 4-Port-Switch or as WLAN-AP while you most likely can chose the 
> 4-Port-NIC which gives you combined with the interated Dual-Port finally 
> a 5-Port-Switch with a WAN-Interface and theres surely some 
> USB3-WLAN-Adapter on the market with is capable to run a 
> WLAN-Accesspoint with "hostapd"
> 
> the operating system lives on a micro sd-card and with 8 GB RAM and 4 
> hard-drive bayes you can do a lot of things with that box
> 
> not to forget with 5 Ethernet cards that you can build up different 
> brdiges/routings and if you need 10 Gigabit, well, place a 10 Gigabit 
> 4-Port-Card in the Slot and use the interal Gigabit NIC for the WAN
> 
> 
> 
I still think you completely miss the point here. 
One of the main ideas here is to transform a cheap 50-100$ device into
something that can do as much as possible on the given hardware. So ofc your
setup that cost 3-10 times more can do more and is faster in some areas.

I specifically asked about home/sbu, yet you keep throwing in server class
hardware in this discussion.
So whats the point you trying to make here and how does this help actually
solving the problems i org. asked about?

thx
Andy

Jeremy Allison <jra <at> samba.org> writes:
> 
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:16:36AM +0000, Andy Walsh wrote:
> > 
> > Also keep in mind that samba3.6 was successfully adopted on any device
that
> > had a usb2.0 port in the past. So slapping a usbstick/sdcard/hdd on a
cheap
> > router is already a common scenario.
> 
> Yes, and I'd like to help you do the same for Samba4.x also.
> 
> Stop moaning about it, and start helping *do* it .
> 
Oki, i just noticed that i have missed the work openembedded did in the last
months, since they seem to have solved the problem in a general way in there
trunk.
https://goo.gl/jixOqE

Its still the most complicated setup any cross compile package uses, but
this looks good. So i guess we now need to convert this to a openWRT (based
on buildroot) compatible setup.

If i understand the waf-samba.bbclass correctly they build the qemu for the
host system and configure it to use the staging_dir environment to generate
the answer files.

So first i need to create a qemu package for openWRT, since currently only a
qemu-guest package is available. I will try to get this running in the next
days and see what problems pop up adapting the openembedded logic.

Btw can you take a look and the config and check if there is anything
missing to reduce the size?
https://goo.gl/fMDbIX

thx
Andy