[Samba] Which Samba version?

samba1 at nym.hush.com samba1 at nym.hush.com
Fri Nov 22 04:14:07 MST 2013

Thanks for the info and advice.  I’m going to stick with Debian for 
now – it seems fine, plus one application I’m going to have to run 
on another server is supported on Debian.  It did cross my mind 
that Squeeze wasn’t around for too long – I did some initial 
testing on Squeeze, and by the time I came to look at things again, 
Wheezy was out.  I’m hoping Wheezy will be around for longer, 
although if it’s stable and if it does what I need it do then it 
could have a longer lifespan in use.  I did consider RedHat…

I’ve got SerNet Samba 4.1.1 installed – the info you gave me 
regarding installation of 3.6 was helpful, and 4.1 went on without 
removing any other applications.  Now I just need to configure it 
and test the migration.

On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 08:49:41 +0000 "L.P.H. van Belle" 
<belle at bazuin.nl> wrote:
>I know your not bashing debian Rowland. ;-) 
>Thats ok, i know you want to do good. ( like me and everybody on 
>the samba list. ) 
>Im just pointing out how good debian is. 
>Debian doesnt have a time table for released, why, its ready when 
>its ready, 
>and when released, the old stable is supported 1 year after 
>release of the latest stable.
>Why does ubuntu have a time table for support, because of its 
>commercial background. 
>And thats logical also. and yes for companies, its better to use 
>Ubuntu LTS for the support. 
>For me, i dont need that kind support, i'll fix these things 
>myself of ask the debian developer.
>im using debian more then 12 years now. started with potato.. 
>Even when upgrade, i've had serveral time that ubuntu breaked my 
>os while upgrading ( also with LTS versions),
>and with debian i never have had that. thats why debian i.m.h.o 
>doesnt need Long term support. 
>Its just what you prefer. I like debian, i like ubuntu and i like 
>Mint ( for desktop ) 
>Just a pointer.. 
>>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>>Van: Rowland Penny [mailto:rowlandpenny at googlemail.com] 
>>Verzonden: donderdag 21 november 2013 9:29
>>Aan: L.P.H. van Belle; samba at lists.samba.org
>>Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Which Samba version?
>>On 21/11/13 08:07, L.P.H. van Belle wrote:
>>> Hai,
>>> I can advice you to first upgrade the pdc to 3.6
>>> but, 3.6 is is not maintained anymore and only gets security 
>>> Its better you invest your time in getting samba4 running.
>>> look here. Follow it to the letter and it wil work.
>>> and really, to the letter. ( its a domain join but you can 
>>use it to setup a single server also.
>>> https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2013-October/176380.html
>>> the steps are the same for debian wheezy.
>>> If your network is upgrading from XP to Win7, its really 
>>advices to go to samba4.
>>> and yes, i can understand why Rowland is saying get the 
>>> But thats not why we have apt.
>>> Which os?
>>> I prefer debian, but for better hardware support on my Dell 
>>server im using Ubuntu 12.04 lts. ( adviced for OMSA )
>>> Yes debian also works fine on Dell but the drivers of ubuntu 
>>are adviced by dell.
>>> And yes Rowland, version (6) was only supported for about 2 
>>1/2 years, but if you want stable..
>>> there is only 1 stable OS, which is ongoing, and which is 
>>safe with upgrading and thats Debian.
>>> Ive tested, so many distro's, and im always going back to 
>>debian. just look here http://distrowatch.com/
>>> en you see 1 2 3, mint, debian ubuntu .. ( all Debian os based 
>>I am not knocking debian, just pointing out that the long support 
>>seems to be a thing of the past, yes it is stable but just not 
>for as 
>>long. In my opinion (again for what it is worth) if you what 
>>to go down 
>>the debian path, use Ubuntu 12.04 server, this will have support 
>>2017, possibly longer than wheezy will have, based on how long 
>>> My old PDC was debian sarge, and now debian lenny and its 
>>still running fine.
>>> FOr me why debian :
>>> PDC Uptime 653days.   upgrade from sarge to lenny
>>> BDC Uptime 886days.   upgraded from etch to lenny
>>> XEN uptime 1632 days. ( with 4 virtuals running )
>>> But this is only my experiance.. You wil find yours...
>>> If you want a quick test, get the this one: 
>>> and try samba4.
>>> Good luck in choosing.
>>> Louis
>>>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>>>> Van: samba1 at nym.hush.com
>>>> [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
>samba1 at nym.hush.com
>>>> Verzonden: woensdag 20 november 2013 18:36
>>>> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>>>> Onderwerp: [Samba] Which Samba version?
>>>> 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 
>>>> samba 3.6”.
>>>> I’m looking to migrate an existing Samba 3.1 PDC to a new 
>>>> and thought that using the latest 3.6 release made sense.  I 
>>>> 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.  
>>>> 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 
>>>> I’ve not used Samba 4 before, and always had it in the back of 
>>>> mind that it might not yet be as stable as 3, plus for now I 
>>>> need AD.  I thought it might be easier to just put the new 
>>>> 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 
>>>> 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 
>>>> 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 
>>>> Louis).  I didn’t know about this until Louis mentioned it.
>>>> 3. Try to get SerNet 3.6.20 working – I thought this might 
>>>> been an easy install, but I could be doing something wrong.  
>>>> had a quick look, and did see someone else had a similar 
>>>> with SerNet on a Uubunto server, where it uninstalled Gnome.  
>>>> 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 
>>>> to look at this if it’s a completely different beastie.  As I 
>>>> I should be able to get the migration working to 3.6, but I’d 
>>>> 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 
>>>> Thanks again.
>>>> -- 
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read 
>>>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

More information about the samba mailing list