[Samba] Offical RHEL AD DC on RHEL
smblist at rednsx.org
Tue Feb 21 15:54:03 UTC 2017
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017, Jeff Sadowski via samba wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Sketch <smblist at rednsx.org> wrote:
>> I also increased the epoch so system updates with a newer version
>> would never override my local build.
> Ouch, changing epoch wouldn't that cause all sorts of havoc with keeping
> client times and server times synced?
> Maybe there is a better way to distinguish the package name so it doesn't
> think it is an upgrade?
> Maybe build it as ADDC-samba-4.X.X so fedora won't try to update it?
In thise case, epoch is just an extra RPM tag used to enforce versioning,
nothing to do with time. You could also rename the package instead, but
the samba package already uses the epoch tag anyway (set differently for
RHEL and Fedora, for some reason).
> I think Fedora will be OK with building later versions as it keeps packages
> a little better up to date.
> Yeah replication is my fear. I'm hoping if I get to a version that supports
> replication better.
> I thought samba 4.6 is suppose to have replication correct?
> or 4.7rcX? or is replication still something I need to do manually with an
> I'm hoping all I need to do to replicate is to join the domain and promote
> it to a DC. Will that work?
That should work. Replication generally works fine, but they have made
fixes and improvements over time, so the newer (stable) version you run,
the better. The only times I have really had any issues in production was
with 4.1, and that was mostly only with manual deletion of objects with
ldbedit not getting replicated. I'm not really sure what's going on with
4.4 or newer on CentOS 7.3. As far as I know, there should be no
replication issues with older versions.
More information about the samba