Muayyad AlSadi wrote:

I made a trivial fix to this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447072#c1

nautilus-share now works, just right click share and you are there

the problem is that this package is broken since the F9 and it's an
orphan package

how can we manage to get it working a gain


You can volunteer to maintain it.


can it be in F10 or it's too late for that an I should hope that it
would be in F11


It's too late to put it in the install image, but there's no reason we couldn't
put it in the yum repo.



note: the fix is trivial which is to replace the directory name from
-1.0 to -2.0

a second thing I want to request a feature for F11
that this package works with zero user configuration
just installing this package, ie. to make the changes in the smb.conf
to be default


The RPM philosophy is that installation and configuration should be separate
activities. There are a few carefully reasoned exceptions we permit, but by and
large, when packagers violate this policy, bad things happen. As a general
rule, installing a GUI convenience package (or having it pulled in as a
dependency) shouldn't mess with your Samba configuration.


If there's a way to make the default smb.conf enable nautilus-share when
installed, and do no harm when not installed, that would be okay if you can
somehow address the inherent security concerns. I doubt that's possible, so it
would probably make more sense to have a configuration wizard.


-- Chris

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Muayyad AlSadi wrote:

I made a trivial fix to this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447072#c1

nautilus-share now works, just right click share and you are there

the problem is that this package is broken since the F9 and it's an
orphan package

how can we manage to get it working a gain


Sign up to be a maintainer.

Rahul

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

> You can volunteer to maintain it.
I proposed to for a packager in FAS but I'm still waiting for the acceptance

> The RPM philosophy is that installation and configuration should be separate activities. There
good policy
yes but the rpm already ships with a config file

rpm -qf /etc/samba/smb.conf
samba-common-3.2.4-0.22.fc10.i386

so I ask for that file in that package to be modified to have a line like this

usershare path = /var/lib/samba/usershare

BTW: I forget that we have system-config-samba

we can put a checkbox [ ] enable nautilus-share

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Muayyad AlSadi wrote:


> yes but the rpm already ships with a config file
>
> rpm -qf /etc/samba/smb.conf
> samba-common-3.2.4-0.22.fc10.i386
>
> so I ask for that file in that package to be modified to have a line like
> this
>
> usershare path = /var/lib/samba/usershare
> BTW: I forget that we have system-config-samba
> we can put a checkbox [ ] enable nautilus-share

I'd suggest you contact the maintainers of these packages (samba, system-config-samba) to work on the implementation details.

-- Rex



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Muayyad AlSadi wrote:

You can volunteer to maintain it.

I proposed to for a packager in FAS but I'm still waiting for the acceptance


The RPM philosophy is that installation and configuration should be separate activities. There

good policy
yes but the rpm already ships with a config file

rpm -qf /etc/samba/smb.conf
samba-common-3.2.4-0.22.fc10.i386


Yes, and the configuration file is owned by *one* package. When multiple
packages try to own the same file, very bad things happen, as evidenced by this
incident:


http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/18/1210257


so I ask for that file in that package to be modified to have a line like this

usershare path = /var/lib/samba/usershare

BTW: I forget that we have system-config-samba

we can put a checkbox [ ] enable nautilus-share



That's exactly how we should do it.

-- Chris

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

I did not say that the sm.conf should be provided by two packages
I said the single one shipped by samba-common should be ready to work
with nautilus-share ie. it should have a line like this

usershare path = /var/lib/samba/usershare

because this has no bad effects if nautilus-share is not installed

>>
>> BTW: I forget that we have system-config-samba
>>
>> we can put a checkbox [ ] enable nautilus-share
>>
>
> That's exactly how we should do it.
>
that's ok for me too
I like any of the two solutions

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list