[Samba] Default Samba version in Debian Bookworm

[Peter Milesson]

On 30.04.2023 10:51, Kees van Vloten via samba wrote:
>
> On 30-04-2023 10:46, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30/04/2023 09:37, Peter Milesson via samba wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30.04.2023 10:20, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30/04/2023 09:06, Peter Milesson via samba wrote:
>>>>> Hi Yvan,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the information, really useful. Essentially, it means I 
>>>>> need to wait for the official release of Debian Bookworm, and then 
>>>>> getting the newest Samba packages from Bookworm backports. It's 
>>>>> just a little over a month away, so there is ample time for 
>>>>> planning upgrades.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is a big problem with this, bookworm hasn't been released yet 
>>>> and as far as I can see, there isn't a bookworm-backports yet.
>>>> The only mention of Samba 4.18 that I can see in Debian is in 
>>>> experimental, a long way from any backports.
>>>>
>>>> Rowland
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hi Rowland,
>>>
>>> According to the link in Yvan's post, the official release date of 
>>> Bookworm is 10 June. So you imply that it will take quite a while 
>>> before Samba 4.18 gets into Bookworm backports? In that case I will 
>>> consider the appropriate packages from Michael's repository.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the information, every bit helps.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not know, I am just guessing, but, as bookworm hasn't been 
>> released yet, i wouldn't expect to see bookworm-backports 
>> immediately, that would be like Debian announcing bookworm but also 
>> saying that it is full of old software.
>> There is also the fact that 4.18 is only in experimental and would 
>> need to progress to sid before it can get into any backports repo.
>>
>> We really need Michael to comment here.
>>
>> Rowland
>>
>>
> Perhaps bookworm-backports  is less important since 4.18 for bookworm 
> is available from Michael's repo.
>
> - Kees.
>
>
Hi Kees, Rowland,

Thanks for your comments. I guess backports are still quite useful, as 
they are "official". Another option is switching to Archlinux. It's 
always the bleeding edge, but I'm quite reluctant to take that path. 
I've been severely bitten on a couple of occasions, when updates broke 
the installations. So that's really a last resort. Only for non critical 
applications.

Best regards,

Peter