Re: Samba: from inetd vs. daemon

[Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>]

> In my humble opinion, a file/printer server must be _fast_. Running
> Samba as a daemon will be a little bit faster than running it from
> inetd. Also, at least some of the members of the Samba team think it's
> better to run Samba as daemons.

I prefer to have it under inetd for two reasons:

  1) You don't need to check an extra file to see what your security setup is

  2) If smbd dies, inetd just starts it up again.

  3) I like to have smaba installed at all my client sites, but many of them
     don't use it much.  If it is run under inetd, this just wastes a little
     of their disk space, if as a daemon it actually impacts on system
     resources, which is bad.

Point 1 could be addressed by making samba use libwrap, so that it takes 
notice of hosts.(allow|deny)

Point 2 is just a throwback to when smbd was actually likely to die at random, 
so probably no longer applies.

Alternatively, how much effort would it be to allow the user to choose if they want to run it under inetd or as a daemon ?

Presumably, you could just have /etc/init.d/samba check if smbd/nmbd were setup in /etc/inetd.conf and quit if so.

Cheers, Phil.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .