[Samba] Samba 4.16 and 4.17 ubuntu focal and jammy packages

[Peter Carlson]

Michael,

Thank you for the extra clarification.  I should have been clearer in my 
questions as well, sadly I sent my email after a long day of 
troubleshooting other issues.

On 11/10/22 22:43, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> After some thought I'd add more points.
>
> 11.11.2022 09:07, Michael Tokarev via samba пишет:
>> 11.11.2022 06:57, Peter Carlson via samba пишет:
>>> 1) what's the difference between 2:4.17.2+dfsg-7 and 2:4.17.2+dfsg-2 ?
>>
>> See the debian/changelog file, as usual. It is unrealistic to answer to
>> questions like this.
>
> While the changelog does list stuff, it is usually quite difficult for 
> the
> end-user to understand what *actually* changed.  And in this very 
> case, nothing
> really changed, there were just packaging tweaks here and there, which 
> is an
> ongoing process.
I usually read the changelogs, It wasn't 100% clear if it was just a 
slightly newer build (ie packaging tweak) or if it was built for a 
different purpose, ie: built only with heimdal or with mit.  Thanks for 
the clarification.
>
>>> 2) Doing an in place upgrade fails.
>>
>> It is not. Please learn to use apt.  You can't upgrade just one package
>> without upgrading its required dependencies too.  This question has 
>> already
>> been answered before several times, and it is not specific in any way to
>> this repository.
>>
>> The proper way, just with the Debian backports for example, is to use -t
>> option when installing/upgrading a "head" package from a non-default 
>> repository.
>> with the argument being the "suite" you want to install from, like, in
>> this case,
>>
>>   apt install -t ubuntu-22.04-jammy/samba-4.17 samba
>
> And this is something which I think needs changing back.  I'll make the
> repository to be considered automatically by apt, by raising its priority
> to the value usual for regular single-package Ubuntu PPAs. Right now it
> works like Debian backports archive which should be only considered for
> certain packages, not for everything. While a PPA, being usually single-
> package, needs to be always considered after being added to sources.list.
> I created this repository like it is a PPA initially, but later changed
> it to behave like a Debian backports archive, to explicitly mark packages
> to install from there using `apt -t' like the above.  I'll change it 
> back.
>
> I didn't know how PPAs work, and haven't realized this is like just 
> another
> PPA.
>
> The thing is just about putting necessary fields into the Release file in
> the repository (which is generated automatically by a script).
>
> /mjt

I actually didn't know about the -t flag.  I normally install each 
dependency one by one, but I didn't really want to do that this time.

The repo as you have it now (as a PPA) upgraded with no complaints.  
Testing now for functionality

Peter