[Samba] Using samba4 with AD and rfc2307 - what are the *current* practices?
steve at steve-ss.com
Mon Dec 16 09:14:41 MST 2013
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 10:52 +0000, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 16/12/13 10:25, Björn JACKE wrote:
> > Rowland,
> > Steve,
> > On 2013-12-13 at 18:32 +0000 Rowland Penny sent off:
> >> You may not have had problems with the sernet packages, but others
> >> have, so it is swings and roundabouts.
> > if you encounter any problem with them or if you find anything with is broken
> > in them, please say what you found to be broken, instead of rant
> > without reasons. I'm curious what problem you found and we're eager to
> > fix it if there is a real problem.
> > Cheers
> > Björn
> Hi, I cannot fully recall all the various problems I had, but it all
> boiled down to the fact that you rename the various debs so that they
> all start with 'sernet-' this would be ok, except that it also removed
> any 'samba' packages that were installed and what was even worse, any
> packages that relied on the removed packages (and there were a lot,).
> So, for at least this reason if no other, I would not recommend the
> sernet packages at all and would advise anybody who wants to use Samba4
> in AD mode, to compile it their self , in the end it works out easier.
Just a +1 from me.
I am in no way suggesting that sernet is worse than any other
distribution. To get anywhere near packaging something as complex as
Samba AD is a credit to you all. I simply believe that the support for
the standard source installation is superior. If you have a problem with
a source Samba 4 installation, then everyone can help.
More information about the samba