[Samba] Default Samba version in Debian Bookworm

[Kees van Vloten]

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
>
You can also create the packages yourself, nearly all the work is 
already done by the Debian maintainer.

Download the sources in the desired version(-tag) from: 
https://salsa.debian.org/samba-team/samba.git and build the packages.

There are a lot ways to build deb-packages, right now I use the debian 
docker builder for that https://github.com/tsaarni/docker-deb-builder.git.
Apart from docker there is nothing you need to setup on your machine. 
The result are identical packages as what would be delivered by the 
debian repo (for that specific version). And since you do it yourself 
you are not dependent on whoever's repos. More or less as fast as 
Archlinux but on Debian!

- Kees.