Swat: Using swat corrupts share's path variable?

[Dan Thurman]

On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 11:30 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 10:22 -0700, Dan Thurman wrote:
> > Folks,
> > 
> > I had a predefined smb.conf file and it worked fine.
> > 
> > However, when I used swat to diddle with the shares,
> > swat seems to have dropped shares from the drop-down
> > selections and also changed the path variable to 
> > /var/spool/samba?
> > 
> > Is this normal?
> ---
> I don't know - I gave up fooling with swat years ago as way too limited
> and like webmin, will mess up a neatly organized smb.conf file.
> 

Good point.  I liked swat only because I liked all the fields shown
up front like a man page with data entry.  Good idea but hard to
maintain it I suppose especially when the fields change from version
to version or when it breaks badly.  Dunno.  I will refrain from using
it at this time.

> I would hope that using swat wouldn't remove shares that are already
> properly defined...that would be bad.
> 

It did in my case but perhaps your mileage may vary.

> isn't /var/spool/samba where they put tdb files? I think that is the
> intent though on RHEL 3, RHEL 4, FC-3, FC-4 they seem to put them
> in /var/cache/samba which seemed to be a Red Hat packaging issue and the
> topic of some consternation on the samba mail list. I would hope that
> Red Hat packaging would have adjusted to /var/spool/samba with the
> release of FC-5 by putting the tdb files there instead
> of /var/cache/samba.

I have no idea what /var/*/samba is for, expecially when the path
variable was updated to use it.  It blew me away (littlerally :-)
I used Samba since it's ineption but fell out of it's use for
a long time due to windoes but now I am back into the game.  A
lot has changed and I am catching up again.

I am now fiddling with SELinux control over samba, yet another
(but necessary security) administrative layer on top.  Things
sure get more complicated with every passing year!  sigh.

> 
> Craig
>