[Samba] Default Samba version in Debian Bookworm

[Peter Milesson]

On 30.04.2023 12:04, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
>
>
> On 30/04/2023 10:52, Peter Milesson via samba wrote:
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> Yes, backports are very useful, but all I am saying is that (and I am 
> guessing here) I wouldn't expect bookworm-backports to appear 
> immediately and when it does, Samba 4.18 will still have to migrate 
> from experimental before it can be backported to bookworm-backports.
>
> I see nothing wrong with using Michaels repo for testing purposes, I 
> just wouldn't use it in production. Not that there is likely to be 
> anything wrong with those Samba packages, it is just that you need to 
> be 110% sure about ongoing support and sadly, look what happened with 
> Louis's repo.
>
> Rowland
>
Hi Rowland,

Yes, that's my reasoning also. I previously used Louis's repo, but I 
succeeded to upgrade to current backports on a few servers, essentially 
without trouble. But better safe, than sorry.

Best regards,

Peter