About Samba4 vs Win2008 differences

[Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer]

Hi Zahari,

I've fixed some more issues on the base of your diffs. Basically as 
already said - display specifiers and schema can't be modified at all 
since these are Microsoft-provided INIs. I think the differences lie in 
the fact that we provide Windows Server 2008R2 (and not 2008) compatible 
ones.

Regarding the various "revision" attributes: I'm not really sure if they 
can be changed arbitrarely. I think raising is no problem - but 
decrementing could be. We will need to compare against Server 2008R2.

The other differences consist in the fact that we don't provide correct 
DNS and file replication entries yet (but also this is planned to be 
fixed in the future when we do adapt these technologies).

Greets,
Matthias

Zahari Zahariev wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> Here you can see results from the source4/scripting/devel/ldapcmp 
> comparison tool that ran today build of Samba4 against Windows 2008 
> (not R2). There are some interesting things in schema.diff concerning 
> attributes like: adminDisplayName, adminDescription, systemMayContain !
>
> Differences in letter case for CN, OU etc. I am interested in are gone 
> for which I thank you!
>
> P.S. Do you think that this diff is not correct and I should run 
> Samba4 against Windows 2008 R2 ??
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Zahari Zahariev 
> <zahari.zahariev at gmail.com <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks a lot Matthias,
>
>     That's what I thought but I wanted just to make sure. I will verify it
>     and will know it is thing from the past.
>
>
>     On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 09:38 +0200, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
>     > Hi Zahari,
>     >
>     > you mean the "OU"->"ou", "CN"->"cn" stuff? This has already been
>     fixed a
>     > month ago
>     >
>     (http://gitweb.samba.org/samba.git/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=ee524d3182de85dff2febaad2481e37ad5a8be8f).
>     >
>     > Matthias
>     >
>     > Zahari Zahariev wrote:
>     > > Hi Matthias,
>     > >
>     > > Have you managed to get anything done from this diff? I am
>     interested
>     > > particularly in "CN" vs "cn" and "OU" vs "ou" etc. stuff.
>     > >
>     > > Thanks!
>     > >
>     > > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Zahari Zahariev
>     > > <zahari.zahariev at gmail.com <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>
>     <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com
>     <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>     > >
>     > >     Thank you Mathias!
>     > >
>     > >     I believed before I have not seen these differences with
>     the same
>     > >     configuration. I will try get results with Windows2008
>     (R2) for
>     > >     Schema and then we will see where is the hurdle.
>     > >
>     > >     -Zahari
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >     On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer
>     > > <mdw at samba.org <mailto:mdw at samba.org> <mailto:mdw at samba.org
>     <mailto:mdw at samba.org>>> wrote:
>     > >
>     > >         Thank you Zahari for providing those outputs. I pushed
>     a huge
>     > >         amount of directory content fixes and will also
>     integrate a
>     > >         fix for the non-normalised RDN attribute names ("CN"
>     instead
>     > >         of "cn", "OU" instead of "ou"...)
>     > >         Regarding the differences in the schema objects I can do
>     > >         nothing (as you know these are MS-provided files and I
>     won't
>     > >         touch them). Could the differences lie in the fact
>     that you
>     > >         have compared the Windows 2008 schema to the Windows
>     2008R2
>     > >         schema (s4)?
>     > >
>     > >         Matthias
>     > >
>     > >         Zahari Zahariev wrote:
>     > >
>     > >             (Resending with smaller attachment)
>     > >
>     > >             Hello Matthias,
>     > >
>     > >             I understand your situation. Here are the three
>     diff files
>     > >             as LDAPCMP shows them now for yesterday Samba4
>     (default
>     > >             provision) vs Win2008 functional level 2008 (not R2).
>     > >
>     > >             I believe the last time I have run that for SCHEMA
>     there
>     > >             were 0 differences but now there are quite a few.
>     Maybe
>     > >             someone has upgraded the Schema at some point.
>     > >
>     > >             Tell me what do you think.
>     > >
>     > >             -Zahari
>     > >
>     > >             On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Zahari Zahariev
>     > > <zahari.zahariev at gmail.com <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>
>     > > <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com
>     <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>>
>     > > <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com
>     <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>
>     > > <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com
>     <mailto:zahari.zahariev at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>     > >
>     > >                Hello Matthias,
>     > >
>     > >                I understand your situation. Here are the three
>     diff
>     > >             files as
>     > >                LDAPCMP shows them now for yesterday Samba4
>     (default
>     > >             provision) vs
>     > >                Win2008 functional level 2008 (not R2).
>     > >
>     > >                I believe the last time I have run that for SCHEMA
>     > >             there were 0
>     > >                differences but now there are quite a few. Maybe
>     > >             someone has
>     > >                upgraded the Schema at some point.
>     > >
>     > >                Tell me what do you think.
>     > >
>     > >                -Zahari
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     >
>
>
>