samba - Oct 2014 - 4.1.11/DebianWheezyBackports vs. 4.1.12/Sernet

Hi all,

I wonder if there are any pro/cons between

using Samba4 of Debian's official Wheezy-backports repository which actually
is version 4.1.11

-or-

using Samba4 of Sernet's official repository which actually is on version
4.1.12

I understand that Sernet's package at that moment is more recent, but
recently I had an issue which was Debian/Samba4 related and unfortunately I made
the experience that no help was offered on freenode's irc-channel #debian to
me with the reason that "Sernet" is *NOT* supported. They adviced me
to use Debian-packages and/or use Wheezy-Backports for more recent packages. I
thought about if I have any (dis-/)advantages when using Debian Wheezy Backports
for obtaining the samba4 packages in future. Are there any pro/cons ? Please
explain to me and what you suggest me to use. Thanks a lot

Mirco

On 22/10/14 11:29, ?icro MEGAS wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wonder if there are any pro/cons between
>
> using Samba4 of Debian's official Wheezy-backports repository which
actually is version 4.1.11
>
> -or-
>
> using Samba4 of Sernet's official repository which actually is on
version 4.1.12
>
> I understand that Sernet's package at that moment is more recent, but
recently I had an issue which was Debian/Samba4 related and unfortunately I made
the experience that no help was offered on freenode's irc-channel #debian to
me with the reason that "Sernet" is *NOT* supported. They adviced me
to use Debian-packages and/or use Wheezy-Backports for more recent packages. I
thought about if I have any (dis-/)advantages when using Debian Wheezy Backports
for obtaining the samba4 packages in future. Are there any pro/cons ? Please
explain to me and what you suggest me to use. Thanks a lot
>
> Mirco
Well, I can understand Debian not supporting the Sernet packages, they 
after all did not create them, but Sernet does support them, but whether 
you would need to pay for that support or not, I am not sure.

Rowland

some insight on this. 

The Pro of the sernet packages. 
More up2date atm
support by sernet of samba mailing list. 
lesser bugs, based on test i've done.

The pro of the debian packages. 
supported by debian
and samba mailing wil help if needed. 
will work with all debian packages from debian itself.
backports available if you need need higher versions of packages. 

The cons of sernet packages. 
the build of sernet is not the same as the debian packages.
not supported by debian.
not all debian packages wil match with the sernet packages. this can give
conflicts.

The cons of debian packages. 
there are 2 debian samba packages. 
samba and samba4 in wheezy. samba4 is a beta and should NOT be used, very buggy.
	in Jessie samba4 replaced by the new samba ( 4.1.x ) 
in de backport package of samba (4.1.11) is a bug which makes that a second DC
does not create it DNS records at join.

so how to use samba on debian.

base on some testing i call tell the following. 
use sernet samba for the AD DC setups. 
you can use "sernet samba" or "samba 3.6.6" or "samba
backports 4.1.x" for a member server.
if you use for example squid with samba, use the debian samba or backported
samba.

above is adviced untill debian gets 4.1.12 in backports, then the join problem
should be fixed.

and maybe other have more info for this, but this is what i know.
my network setup. 
DC's are Sernet samba.
Member servers ( for file shares ) are sernet samba.
Member servers ( for auth agains for example squid/zarafa debian backported
samba

There are more options, but this works ok for me. 


Louis

>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: micromegas at mail333.com 
>[mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens ?icro MEGAS
>Verzonden: woensdag 22 oktober 2014 12:30
>Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>Onderwerp: [Samba] 4.1.11/DebianWheezyBackports vs. 4.1.12/Sernet
>
>Hi all,
>
>I wonder if there are any pro/cons between
>
>using Samba4 of Debian's official Wheezy-backports repository 
>which actually is version 4.1.11
>
>-or-
>
>using Samba4 of Sernet's official repository which actually is 
>on version 4.1.12
>
>I understand that Sernet's package at that moment is more 
>recent, but recently I had an issue which was Debian/Samba4 
>related and unfortunately I made the experience that no help 
>was offered on freenode's irc-channel #debian to me with the 
>reason that "Sernet" is *NOT* supported. They adviced me to 
>use Debian-packages and/or use Wheezy-Backports for more 
>recent packages. I thought about if I have any 
>(dis-/)advantages when using Debian Wheezy Backports for 
>obtaining the samba4 packages in future. Are there any 
>pro/cons ? Please explain to me and what you suggest me to 
>use. Thanks a lot
>
>Mirco
>-- 
>To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>
>

On 14:41:05 wrote ?icro MEGAS:
> Hi all,
> 
> I wonder if there are any pro/cons between
> 
> using Samba4 of Debian's official Wheezy-backports repository which
> actually is version 4.1.11
> 
> -or-
> 
> using Samba4 of Sernet's official repository which actually is on
> version 4.1.12
> 
> I understand that Sernet's package at that moment is more recent, but
> recently I had an issue which was Debian/Samba4 related and
> unfortunately I made the experience that no help was offered on
> freenode's irc-channel #debian to me with the reason that
"Sernet"
> is *NOT* supported. They adviced me to use Debian-packages and/or
> use Wheezy-Backports for more recent packages. I thought about if I
> have any (dis-/)advantages when using Debian Wheezy Backports for
> obtaining the samba4 packages in future. Are there any pro/cons ?
> Please explain to me and what you suggest me to use. Thanks a lot
> 
> Mirco
I use packages from wheezy-backports.

The packages from sernet are surly newer, but they have a big show 
stopper. These packages do not flag themselve as "samba" or
"smbclient"
or any other package name used by Debian.
So what happens, if one ever installed a Debian package which depends on 
samba or smbclient? The Debian packages get installed and one ends up 
with two packages in different versions.

My configured servers has often other services installed i.e. mail and 
squid. So i need the pam modules and the ntlm helper from winbind.

If one need a dedicated smb server, then the sernet package is the best 
choice.

-- 

Regards
	Harry Jede

On 22/10/14 07:29, ?icro MEGAS wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wonder if there are any pro/cons between
>
> using Samba4 of Debian's official Wheezy-backports repository which
actually is version 4.1.11
>
> -or-
>
> using Samba4 of Sernet's official repository which actually is on
version 4.1.12
>
> I understand that Sernet's package at that moment is more recent, but
recently I had an issue which was Debian/Samba4 related and unfortunately I made
the experience that no help was offered on freenode's irc-channel #debian to
me with the reason that "Sernet" is *NOT* supported. They adviced me
to use Debian-packages and/or use Wheezy-Backports for more recent packages. I
thought about if I have any (dis-/)advantages when using Debian Wheezy Backports
for obtaining the samba4 packages in future. Are there any pro/cons ? Please
explain to me and what you suggest me to use. Thanks a lot
>
> Mirco
I have installed Samba 4 and migrated from 3 using Debian-backports 
without problems, except, as commented, the missing DNS registries when 
you add an additional DC (I had to manually create them).

Consider that when Jessie reach stable Samba4 will come from Backports

My suggestion: If you use Debian, then, choose Backports

Regards

Federico