[Samba] Broken Dependencies?

[Michael Tokarev]

[Catching up with old(ish) emails, hopefully]

25.05.2022 01:10, Andrew Bartlett via samba wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-05-24 at 14:25 +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
..
>> What do you mean "built without backtrace support"?  How one builds with
>> or without backtrace support, - I don't know this term.
...
> In short, if libunwind is found on the system at build time, Samba will

Aha. I didn't know, and apparently no one in the Debian samba team did
know, either. I've added libunwind-dev build dependency now, and it is
picked up by the build procedure. Indeed, in debian we had no stack
backtrace support in samba, now we do have it. I just tried - killing
smbd with SIGSEGV produces a nice backtrace now.

> do an internal stack unwind that at least gives us a first clue, but
> ideally we need the full gdb backtrace, ideally by having the
> gdb_backtrace script packaged so the admin can specify it.
> 
> Long ago Debian packages used to mail the admin when Samba crashed with
> a backtrace, I don't know when that stopped happening.

It is still the same, nothing had changed in this area. But with time,
working email setup is less and less common on a typical linux system,
so the reports aren't being emailed as often as before. Also, it depends
on gdb to be installed to actually *produce* a report in the first place.

> "We" should add info on installing the right packages and enabling this
> to https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Bug_Reporting to give folks a clue
> so I stop repeating myself on the lists...

Actually this wiki page isn't useful now. But the problem is: my first
conclusion after trying to find some info about one or another aspect of
samba was that the samba wiki is right to useless generally. And after
several tries, it doesn't occur to me anymore to think about using samba
wiki at all..  hwell..

/mjt