Bug 544 - 2.2.8a/2.2.9pre1 cvs - vfs module ignores SIGHUP
2.2.8a/2.2.9pre1 cvs - vfs module ignores SIGHUP
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: Samba 2.2
Classification: Unclassified
Component: File Services
2.2.8a
All Linux
: P3 normal
: ---
Assigned To: Gerald (Jerry) Carter
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2003-09-30 17:41 UTC by Thomas Bork
Modified: 2005-11-14 09:25 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Thomas Bork 2003-09-30 17:41:36 UTC
Hi,

with 2.2.9pre1 from cvs
(ftp://pserver.samba.org/pub/unpacked/samba_2_2 - downloaded on 14. Sep
2003) the vfs modules ignores SIGHUP-ing the smbd.

Relevant Part of smb.conf:

[public]
   comment = public directory on %h
   browseable = yes
   writeable = yes
   path = /public
   oplocks = no
   level2 oplocks = no
   blocking locks = no
   public = yes
   read list = tb
   write list =
   create mask = 0777
   directory mask = 0777
   vfs object = /usr/lib/samba/vscan-oav.so
   vfs options = config-file = /etc/vscan-oav.conf

If normal starting or restarting samba, the scannerdaemon and
samba-vscan are working fine. But removing the vfs options from smb.conf
and kill -SIGHUP all smbds, samba-vscan is always working.

If having

[public]
   comment = public directory on %h
   browseable = yes
   writeable = yes
   path = /public
   oplocks = no
   level2 oplocks = no
   blocking locks = no
   public = yes
   read list = tb
   write list =
   create mask = 0777
   directory mask = 0777

and normal (re)starting samba, samba-vscan is not working -ok. Adding

   vfs object = /usr/lib/samba/vscan-oav.so
   vfs options = config-file = /etc/vscan-oav.conf

and kill -SIGHUP all smbds, samba-vscan is not working. Seemed, that vfs
modules don't recognizing SIGHUP of smbd or changes of smb.conf (every
60 seconds and for every new connection the smb.conf will scanned.

With samba version 2.2.8a there is the same problem 

der tom
Comment 1 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2004-02-17 08:45:52 UTC
Sorry, but the 2.2 is not under development any longer.
If you can reproduce this bug against the latest 3.0 release, 
please reopen this bug and change the version in the report.
Thanks.
Comment 2 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2005-11-14 09:25:10 UTC
database cleanup