samba - Aug 2020 - Samba rpms now available from CentOS Storage SIG

Hi all,

This is to announce the availability of Samba(and CTDB) rpms from
Storage SIG[1] on CentOS 7 and 8. Visit Samba's CentOS wiki page[2] for
more details on installation steps.

[1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
[2] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Samba

Regards,
Anoop C S.

On 17/08/2020 07:35, Anoop C S via samba wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is to announce the availability of Samba(and CTDB) rpms from
> Storage SIG[1] on CentOS 7 and 8. Visit Samba's CentOS wiki page[2] for
> more details on installation steps.
>
> [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
> [2] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Samba
>
> Regards,
> Anoop C S.
Hi Anoop, Are these packages capable of provisioning an AD domain with 
Heimdal ?

Rowland

On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 07:47 +0100, Rowland penny via samba
wrote:
> On 17/08/2020 07:35, Anoop C S via samba wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This is to announce the availability of Samba(and CTDB) rpms from
> > Storage SIG[1] on CentOS 7 and 8. Visit Samba's CentOS wiki
page[2]
> > for
> > more details on installation steps.
> > 
> > [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
> > [2] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Samba
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Anoop C S.
> 
> Hi Anoop, Are these packages capable of provisioning an AD domain
> with 
> Heimdal ?
Nope, these are built with system MIT kerberos requirement and does not
contain bits and pieces to setup Samba as an AD domain controller.

For better clarity I will update wiki page to contain this information.

Thanks,
Anoop C S.

On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 12:05 +0530, Anoop C S via samba
wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This is to announce the availability of Samba(and CTDB) rpms from
> Storage SIG[1] on CentOS 7 and 8. Visit Samba's CentOS wiki page[2]
> for
> more details on installation steps.
> 
> [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
> [2] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Samba
G'Day Anoop,

I'm wondering how you plan to handle the need for a modern GnuTLS for
these builds?

I take it that you plan to just avoid Samba 4.12 and later on RHEL 8 /
CentOS 8?  

Initially this sounds like a reasonable option but there is a further
wrinkle:  Samba 4.12 exposes a GnuTLS bug:
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14399
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1845083
https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/merge_requests/1278

Is there some way this is dodged or are you in a position to ensure
CentOS gets this fixed in that package (I can't see a patch in the
CentOS repo).

If you plan to write a compat-gnutls package do let me know as I would
like to exchange notes...

On the Samba side of things, how should we handle this?  Can we even
detect this somehow and refuse to use the leaky routines?

Andrew Bartlett 
-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  https://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          
https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

On Thu, 2020-08-20 at 20:04 +1200, Andrew Bartlett via samba
wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 12:05 +0530, Anoop C S via samba wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This is to announce the availability of Samba(and CTDB) rpms from
> > Storage SIG[1] on CentOS 7 and 8. Visit Samba's CentOS wiki
page[2]
> > for
> > more details on installation steps.
> > 
> > [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
> > [2] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage/Samba
> 
> G'Day Anoop,
> 
> I'm wondering how you plan to handle the need for a modern GnuTLS for
> these builds?
> 
> I take it that you plan to just avoid Samba 4.12 and later on RHEL 8
> /
> CentOS 8?
Yes and I hope you meant RHEL 7/CentOS 7 as they do not have minimum
required GnuTLS version for building Samba 4.12 or later.
> Initially this sounds like a reasonable option but there is a further
> wrinkle:  Samba 4.12 exposes a GnuTLS bug:
> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14399
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1845083
> https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/merge_requests/1278
> 
> Is there some way this is dodged or are you in a position to ensure
> CentOS gets this fixed in that package (I can't see a patch in the
> CentOS repo).
Build process for those Samba packages are currently dependant on the
GnuTLS version with default RHEL 8/CentOS 8 repositories. I am hopeful
that with the following bug, we will have the fix available eventually
with CentOS 8 too.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1844112
> If you plan to write a compat-gnutls package do let me know as I
> would
> like to exchange notes...
Not yet.
> On the Samba side of things, how should we handle this?  Can we even
> detect this somehow and refuse to use the leaky routines?
I haven't thought about it. I will communicate when I have something to
share.