On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:08:47 -0700, Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote:
On 29.08.2014 04:42, Sean Healy wrote:On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 19:28:03 -0700, Augustin Cavalier <waddlesplash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: The correct solution is to fix the NetFS source code. Ah, but the problem is not in the NetFS code. It is in cant/remember/the/real/path/driver_settings.cpp, and a change there will affect many other packages.The driver settings code can load driver settings files from anywhere.
True, but that would mean hard-coding an absolute path.Well, I suppose I could use the appropriate constant to build an absolute path that is in the system settings folder. But that seems like redundant effort, since the comments in driver_settings.cpp indicate it's going to (someday) start using the system folder anyway.
However, the server code looks like it should not require a settings file, but fall back to default settings. If that doesn't work, it's a bug. Note that the default settings don't define any shares or users, so that isn't a configuration that will immediately work. Shares and users can be defined with the command line preference tool (obviously a GUI preflet would be nice to have).To sum it up, a settings file -- neither a template nor an actual one -- should not be added to the package.
Okay, how about this:I place an html file in the repo at docs/add-ons/netfs/NetFS.html, which will include the information found here: <https://www.haiku-os.org/community/forum/using_netfs>.
I then include that doc file with the package instead of a settings template file. Is there a recommended location for docs? Some packages put it in documentation/packages, some just in documentation.
The old way of building NetFS added the netfs and userlandfs default settings files to the image, but since we're not going to include them in the NetFS package, I will simply remove them from the repo.
There is one snag, though: the userlandfs default settings file contains settings for OpenBFS in addition to those for NetFS, and we will lose those. I'm not sure that's a problem, since we already have a kernel file system add-on for BFS anyway.
