[Samba] Which Samba version?

Rowland Penny rowlandpenny at googlemail.com
Wed Nov 20 11:13:08 MST 2013

On 20/11/13 17:36, samba1 at nym.hush.com wrote:
> Following on from my post about problems installing SerNet on
> Debian, and Rowland’s suggestion to start “yet again, forget
> sernet, download and compile samba 4.1.1 and then use it just like
> samba 3.6”.
> I’m looking to migrate an existing Samba 3.1 PDC to a new server,
> and thought that using the latest 3.6 release made sense.  I have
> to replicate the old server on the new one, and make sure there are
> no problems with the SIDs etc on all the existing PCs.  Basically,
> the new server just has to take over, and work!  I did test this a
> while back, and got a test migration to work with Debian Squeezy.
> I’ve not used Samba 4 before, and always had it in the back of my
> mind that it might not yet be as stable as 3, plus for now I don’t
> need AD.  I thought it might be easier to just put the new server
> in with Samba 3, and then perhaps look at an upgrade-in-place to 4
> if ever needed.
> My options appear to be:
> 1. Keep the 3.6.6 as bundled with Debian Wheezy.  Are there any
> problems with this?  Currently all PCs are WinXP, but after the new
> server goes in I’ll need to install some Windows 7/8 PCs.  I did
> test a Windows 7 PC with the Debian Squeezy Samba (3.5.6?), and it
> worked okay.
> 2. Install the Debian Backports 3.6.19 version (as suggested by
> Louis).  I didn’t know about this until Louis mentioned it.
> 3. Try to get SerNet 3.6.20 working – I thought this might have
> been an easy install, but I could be doing something wrong.  I’ve
> had a quick look, and did see someone else had a similar problem
> with SerNet on a Uubunto server, where it uninstalled Gnome.  There
> was no follow-up so I’m not sure if this was resolved.
> 4. Look at Samba 4.  However, with my timescales, I wouldn’t want
> to look at this if it’s a completely different beastie.  As I say,
> I should be able to get the migration working to 3.6, but I’d be
> worried that migrating to 4 might introduce a lot more problems and
> complications.
> I’m interested to know what you think would be the best option(s).
> Thanks again.
Hi, the reason I suggested S4 is that the next release of 3.6 will be 
the last proper release, after that it is just security fixes. S4 can be 
run just like S3 or if you want to, it can be an AD DC, so to put it 
into the OP's terms, it can be a different beastie or it can be 
virtually the same beastie but one that will get updates.

You pays your money and makes your choices ;-)


More information about the samba mailing list