Kees van Vloten
2022-Oct-28 10:20 UTC
[Samba] Samba 4.16 and 4.17 ubuntu focal and jammy packages
On 28-10-2022 12:01, Michael Tokarev wrote:> 28.10.2022 12:59, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> 28.10.2022 12:54, Kees van Vloten wrote: >> ... >>> The one way out to maintain controlled Samba upgrades right now is >>> to use your Ubuntu Focal repos, since Focal is originally based on >>> Bullseye that is likely to work, at least it has the right versions >>> in its dependencies for Bullseye. But yeah, it sounds like a dirty >>> hack, not really the way I want to go. >> >> *gosh*. >> >> Why don't you use bullseye-backports?? > > No, seriously. > > Samba in bullseye-backports is *the same* samba as available in my > repository > (it is just a *bit* older for now, I'll push current version to bpo11 > tomorrow > once current unstable migrates to testing).? But it is built > especially on > bullseye.? There's no need to do that strange thing... > > Yes, there's no 4.17 samba in bpo for now. Hmm..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. Of course apt-pinning helps, but it has another risk: a re-install in case of some other issue fails due to pinned version no longer in repo (so the problem of fixing a machine is worsened by having to upgrade it a the same time). The only way I see this working (but maybe I am mistaken) is to have a repo-index per Samba version, i.e. multiple repos, one for each Samba version. That would mean 2 repos: current version (4.17), previous version (4.16), I can flip the sources.list per domain-controller at the moment I want to upgrade that domain-controller.> > /mjt >
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-28 10:36 UTC
[Samba] Samba 4.16 and 4.17 ubuntu focal and jammy packages
On 28/10/2022 11:20, Kees van Vloten via samba wrote:> > 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. > Of course apt-pinning helps, but it has another risk: a re-install in > case of some other issue fails due to pinned version no longer in repo > (so the problem of fixing a machine is worsened by having to upgrade it > a the same time). > > The only way I see this working (but maybe I am mistaken) is to have a > repo-index per Samba version, i.e. multiple repos, one for each Samba > version. That would mean 2 repos: current version (4.17), previous > version (4.16), I can flip the sources.list per domain-controller at the > moment I want to upgrade that domain-controller. >There is nothing stopping you setting up a local repo just containing the Samba packages. Before Michael took over the Debian Samba maintenance, Samba on Buster was very much in the doldrums, it seemed to stick at 4.9.5 for ever. No doubt it got security patches etc, but it never changed version and there wasn't a later version available. Bullseye came out with Samba 4.13.x and for a while it looked like this was going to be Buster all over again. However, Michael has provided 4.16.x packages via backports (something that I am very grateful for) and it looks like that eventually the backport packages will be replaced by 4.17.x packages. Lets be honest, Michael could have stopped there, but he hasn't, he is now providing Samba packages for Ubuntu (something that Ubuntu doesn't seem capable/want to do). I think that everyone should be grateful for everything that Michael is doing, one man can only do so much. Rowland