samba - Nov 2007 - Big problems with 3.0.24-6etch6 Debian packages

Hi,
I'm using Samba as a PDC with roaming profiles on a Debian Etch machine, 
the clients are Windows XP/2000 machines.

I just installed security upgrades with aptitude, and this upgraded all 
samba 3.0.24-6etch4 packages to 3.0.24-6etch6 (except for samba-doc 
which was upgraded to 3.0.24-6etch7).
Immediately after the upgrade, my users could not load their profiles at 
login anymore. Errors popped out regarding problems loading 
insignificant files from their profiles, such as cookies, links to 
recently opened files, Java cache files, etc.
This caused Windows to open up a new temporary profile, making everyone 
lose their settings. PANIC!!

I now downgraded back to all 3.0.24-6etch4 packages, and things seem to 
be working fine again.

What's happening with Samba packages for Debian Etch?
I saw a security announce yesterday by Steve Kemp, but it's a bit 
confusing, for Etch it lists some 6etch6 packages and some 6etch7 others.
Are the current packages broken?

And... is there anyone officially working on more up-to-date Samba 
packages for Debian Etch? Or will we have to live with 3.0.24 until the 
next Debian stable upgrade?

Thanks.

-- 
Ciao,
   Marco.

Am Dienstag, den 27.11.2007, 09:58 +0100 schrieb Marco De
Vitis:
> Hi,
> I'm using Samba as a PDC with roaming profiles on a Debian Etch
machine,
> the clients are Windows XP/2000 machines.
> 
> I just installed security upgrades with aptitude, and this upgraded all 
> samba 3.0.24-6etch4 packages to 3.0.24-6etch6 (except for samba-doc 
> which was upgraded to 3.0.24-6etch7).
> Immediately after the upgrade, my users could not load their profiles at 
> login anymore. Errors popped out regarding problems loading 
> insignificant files from their profiles, such as cookies, links to 
> recently opened files, Java cache files, etc.
> This caused Windows to open up a new temporary profile, making everyone 
> lose their settings. PANIC!!
> 
> I now downgraded back to all 3.0.24-6etch4 packages, and things seem to 
> be working fine again.
> 
> What's happening with Samba packages for Debian Etch?
> I saw a security announce yesterday by Steve Kemp, but it's a bit 
> confusing, for Etch it lists some 6etch6 packages and some 6etch7 others.
> Are the current packages broken?
> 
> And... is there anyone officially working on more up-to-date Samba 
> packages for Debian Etch? Or will we have to live with 3.0.24 until the 
> next Debian stable upgrade?
We have exactly the same problem here.

Greets from hell,
Marcus

Quoting Marco De Vitis (starless@spin.it):

> What's happening with Samba packages for Debian Etch?
We're trying to keep up with upstream's security announcements and
regressions they induce.

> I saw a security announce yesterday by Steve Kemp, but it's a bit 
> confusing, for Etch it lists some 6etch6 packages and some 6etch7 others.
> Are the current packages broken?
3.0.24-etch5 is the first roll-up of packages fixing CVE-2007-5398 and
CVE-2007-4572

3.0.24-etch6 fixes a regression introduced in -etch5 (indeed introduced in
upstream's initial published fixes). That regression affects those
people who use smbfs only.

Apparently, however, another regression which seems to affect long
directory listings is present in -etch6 and might lead to -etch7 packages.

And, given the recent updates we're receiving (#453050, #453102,
#453145: I love when people don't even read the BTS when reporting
issues), it's not finished.

And, sorry for this, but the time given to these issues by the samba
package maintainers (these days mostly Steve Langasek and me) is
currently very short. Steve spent days of work on these recent updates
and can't currently work on them. So you're quite likely to need
waiting some time before this is fixed. In the meantim, you should
revert back to -etch5

>
> And... is there anyone officially working on more up-to-date Samba packages
> for Debian Etch? Or will we have to live with 3.0.24 until the next Debian 
> stable upgrade?

This is not new in Debian. You will never get a new upstream version
update for the stable distribution. Updates only include security
fixes. 

You might want to get packages built by the Samba team if you want to
keep your samba server with the bleeding edge samba.

Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 27.11.2007, 09:58 +0100 schrieb Marco De
Vitis:
> Hi,
> I'm using Samba as a PDC with roaming profiles on a Debian Etch
machine,
> the clients are Windows XP/2000 machines.
> 
> I just installed security upgrades with aptitude, and this upgraded all 
> samba 3.0.24-6etch4 packages to 3.0.24-6etch6 (except for samba-doc 
> which was upgraded to 3.0.24-6etch7).
> Immediately after the upgrade, my users could not load their profiles at 
> login anymore. Errors popped out regarding problems loading 
> insignificant files from their profiles, such as cookies, links to 
> recently opened files, Java cache files, etc.
> This caused Windows to open up a new temporary profile, making everyone 
> lose their settings. PANIC!!
> 
> I now downgraded back to all 3.0.24-6etch4 packages, and things seem to 
> be working fine again.
> 
> What's happening with Samba packages for Debian Etch?
> I saw a security announce yesterday by Steve Kemp, but it's a bit 
> confusing, for Etch it lists some 6etch6 packages and some 6etch7 others.
> Are the current packages broken?
> 
> And... is there anyone officially working on more up-to-date Samba 
> packages for Debian Etch? Or will we have to live with 3.0.24 until the 
> next Debian stable upgrade?
>From time to time we still have broken profiles although I've downgraded
our machine back to a working debian package on 27th Nov. to avoid more
damage. At the moment a samba 3.0.24-6etch9 is installed. But it seems
that the broken samba package has crashed the profiles of those users,
which were logged in when the broken package was installed. Those users
have problems to load their profiles. At the first login the default
profile is loaded, because the client has problems to sync files from
the server. The user has to log out and start a second login, which
works fine then. In some hard cases we have to remove the local and the
server profile to get it working again. Any idea how to fix this? It's a
kind of horror the get up to ten calls a day to fix roaming profiles.

Ciao!
Marcus