Michael Tokarev
2022-Oct-28 10:28 UTC
[Samba] Samba 4.16 and 4.17 ubuntu focal and jammy packages
28.10.2022 13:20, Kees van Vloten wrote: ..>>> Why don't you use bullseye-backports??..> Because a single repo means a single repo-index with a single Samba version. Any apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade has the risk of going to a > different Samba version. I want that for *all* packages except Samba.Aha. Now I see. Once I update samba-backports with samba-4.17 it will be upgraded automatically which you don't want to do. But you still want it to be upgraded from 4.16.5 to 4.16.6. That makes sense. It's an interesting observation indeed. I'll think about it. Now, there's one more question. Why it is so risky to upgrade to a new samba "major" release? /mjt
Rowland Penny
2022-Oct-29 16:06 UTC
[Samba] Samba 4.16 and 4.17 ubuntu focal and jammy packages
On 28/10/2022 11:28, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote:> 28.10.2022 13:20, Kees van Vloten wrote: > .. >>>> Why don't you use bullseye-backports?? > .. >> Because a single repo means a single repo-index with a single Samba >> version. Any apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade has the risk of >> going to a different Samba version. I want that for *all* packages >> except Samba. > > Aha.? Now I see.? Once I update samba-backports with samba-4.17 it will be > upgraded automatically which you don't want to do. But you still want it > to be upgraded from 4.16.5 to 4.16.6.? That makes sense. > > It's an interesting observation indeed.? I'll think about it. > > Now, there's one more question. Why it is so risky to upgrade > to a new samba "major" release? > > /mjt >Because Samba has an habit of removing, adding or changing things and this leads to old versions of things being left on disk and interfering with the smooth running of Samba. One that springs to mind is the python 'time', Samba had its own version and then removed it, but the distros didn't. Starting with a new OS, also ensures that everything is correct and nothing 'old' is there. Rowland