Why keep the old kio/smb? (was: Re: new component for bugs.kde.org)
neundorf at kde.org
Wed Mar 19 20:39:12 GMT 2003
On Wednesday 19 March 2003 21:33, Luis Pedro Coelho wrote:
> Given that that slave did not change since your above quoted message, and
> yours seems to have pretty recent patches, I don't see the point in keeping
> the other around.
Well, conceptionally a smb-ioslave which uses a library which is specifically
designed for such uses is better.
But somebody has to work on it.
> I use neither of the slaves so I am unaware of the issues. Still, I think
> it is a bit idiotic to have two, from the users view, indistiguishable
> components and forcing Alex to ask:
> Does your kio_smb.so link to libsmbclient.so ? (ldd kio_smb.so)
Yes, I don't like this either.
> Searching in lists.kde.org didn't bring up any discussions on this, but I
> could have missed something.
There were discussions, leading to "compile the libsmbclient.so one if this
lib is found, otherwise the other one".
Work: alexander.neundorf at jenoptik.com - http://www.jenoptik-los.de
Home: neundorf at kde.org - http://www.kde.org
alex at neundorf.net - http://www.neundorf.net
More information about the kde-core-devel