samba - Sep 2021 - wiki entry regarding updating self compiled samba addc (4.11.x -> 4.15.0 in my case)

On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 20:04 +0200, J?rgen Echter wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> yeah i did that and thats also mentionend on the wiki, thats why i'm
> asking as it wasn't that clear to me.
I will try to make it clearer.
> > 
> > 
> > Depends, if you just ran './configure', then delete
> > /usr/local/samba
> > (after backing it up), if you used a different PREFIX, then delete
> > PREFIX/samba
> ok, this would force me to join a new machine as a restore is not
> possible on an already productive DC regarding to the wiki.
Well, yes, it probably would.



> then i'll do that next time, i thought i could do an inplace upgrade
> without touching/moving my roaming profiles i got on there.
It isn't recommended to use a DC for anything other than
authentication, you really should have the roaming profiles on a Unix
domain member

Rowland

On 9/28/21 13:46, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 20:04 +0200, J?rgen Echter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>> yeah i did that and thats also mentionend on the wiki, thats why
i'm
>> asking as it wasn't that clear to me.
> 
> I will try to make it clearer.
> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Depends, if you just ran './configure', then delete
>>> /usr/local/samba
>>> (after backing it up), if you used a different PREFIX, then delete
>>> PREFIX/samba
>> ok, this would force me to join a new machine as a restore is not
>> possible on an already productive DC regarding to the wiki.
> 
> Well, yes, it probably would.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> then i'll do that next time, i thought i could do an inplace
upgrade
>> without touching/moving my roaming profiles i got on there.
> 
> It isn't recommended to use a DC for anything other than
> authentication, you really should have the roaming profiles on a Unix
> domain member
> 

I thought everyone was trying to get away from roaming profiles because, 
for example the AppData folder starts to fill up with cruft like browser 
and email caches, making login/logout times unbearably long for users.

Does this work better than in the PDC/NTLM days? I'm in the process of 
upgrading such a network (which has admittedly been in place far too 
long) and it literally takes 45 minutes for users to logon or logoff. 
They specifically asked not to have roaming profiles for this reason, so 
I was just going to map the Dektop, Documents, Downloads, etc. folders 
(I think this is called Windows Profile Folder Redirection) using a GPO, 
which seems to be how most people are doing it these days.

Also, this page:
https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Roaming_Windows_User_Profiles

tells me:
-----------------
Whilst it is possible to use POSIX ACLs for the profiles share on an 
Unix domain member, it is recommended that you set up the permissions 
from Windows. To do this, see Setting up the Profiles Share on the Samba 
File Server - Using Windows ACLs.
-----------------

Hmm, well yeah, but I linux desktops too and the permissions need to 
work everywhere, so POSIX extended ACLs it is. Of course I have no 
intention of putting any shares on the DC, so that's not a consideration.

Final question about this: The page referenced above shows a chart of 
Windows profile suffixes. Since part of this project includes setting up 
several new PCs which will presumably be upgraded to the most current 
version of Windows 10, I found the lack of a server reference in that 
chart for Profile version V6 to be a but unnerving. Does this mean Samba 
does not work with V6 profiles; or maybe I should be asking what is the 
difference between, say, V4, V5, and V6?

I'm guessing this fact alone should be a deterrent to using Windows 
Profiles? "Most notable about Windows 10, however, is that the 'profile
version' increments can now happen with Windows 10?s feature upgrades."