[Samba] Which sub version of Samba 4.19 will be considered for Debian bookworm-backports?

Rowland Penny rpenny at samba.org
Tue Sep 5 17:50:18 UTC 2023

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 19:20:17 +0200
Peter Milesson via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I'm just curious about which subversion of Samba 4.19 that will
> trickle down to Debian bookworm-backports?
> I have a hunch I saw a note from either Rowland or Louis van Belle
> quite a few years back on this list, that the .0 and .1, and
> possibly .2 versions of Samba, are not considered stable enough for
> production. Please, correct me if I have got it wrong.

It was Louis that said that he didn't use '.0' & '.1' minor Samba
versions in production and I said something like 'I don't use the .0
versions', but that was a long time ago and was after there had been a
couple of major releases that had had problems, these problems do not
seem to happen now and I am quite willing to use any supported Samba
versions, this includes '.0' & '.1' versions.
> Otherwise it would be interesting to know, as I plan integration with 
> Microsoft Azure later this year. What I understand, Microsoft has 
> changed the requirements to at least AD forest level 2016 for that 
> integration, while previously 2008R2 was sufficient.

I have no idea if 4.19.x will go into Bookworm-backports and I also do
not think that Samba has any pull on this. The person who may know is
Michael Tokarev, the Debian Samba maintainer.


More information about the samba mailing list