[Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#672497: Bug#672497: Bug#672497: full support for usershares (public shares)

[email.bug at arcor.de]

> My concern is that "map to guest" not only affects user shares but
> also regular shares.

Let's see. This may mostly only be the case with the "map to guest =
bad user" option.
(Because "usershare allow guests = yes" is usershare specific.)

What happens without the bad user mapping?
Clients have problems to connect, even if a share is explicitly set
to be public.
The bad user mapping seems needed to make public shares work 
effectively in all setups I know.
(Of course no no public shares are set up by default.)
Map to guest should introduce no new risk vector,
because clients could always just try the nobody account directly. 


> Do we really want to change upstream defaults for our default installs
> to make it easier to enable a functionality that makes sense mostly
> for desktop users?

Many server setups may not use local user accounts at all. Nevertheless,
it should be safer to run processes and shares under a restricted user
account than with root permissions. Also note that, in order for a local
user to be able to create a share at all, the user must first be added to the
"sambashare" group.