[Samba] Upgrading from samba version 4.20.5 to 4.21.1 using Debian Bookworm-backports

[Michael Tokarev]

06.11.2024 12:50, spindles seven via samba wrote:
> Hi
> I tried to update a member server's samba version from 4.20.5 to 4.21.1 using Bookworm-backports and get the following error:
> 
> roy at moggy:~$ sudo apt upgrade
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree... Done
> Reading state information... Done
> Calculating upgrade... Done
> Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
> or been moved out of Incoming.
> The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> 
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   samba : Breaks: samba-ad-dc (< 2:4.20.1+dfsg-2~) but 2:4.17.12+dfsg-0+deb12u1 is to be installed
>           Breaks: samba-ad-provision (< 2:4.20.5+dfsg) but 2:4.17.12+dfsg-0+deb12u1 is to be installed
> E: Broken packages

For a member server, you don't need samba-ad-dc or samba-ad-provision, - you can
uninstall these just fine (probably together with samba-dsdb-modules).  Actually
you don't even have these installed, it seems - so in this your case, I'd recommend
using `apt upgrade --no-install-recommends` (heh).

Overall, debian backports is always like this, - one have to understand how
it works. apt considers only packages already installed from bpo to be installable
from bpo, not any new dependencies which should be *also* installed from backports.
So in case a new dependency (or a recommendation) appears which refer to backports,
one have to either explicitly specify `-t bookworm-backports` or resolve  the
dependencies in other ways.

Here, only new recommends has appeared, not actual dependencies, and that's just
samba-ad-dc which you don't need anyway, - that's why --no-install-recommends in
this particular case is ok.

On the other hand, my debian/ubuntu samba repository does not have "NoAutomaticUpgrade: yes'
setting like backports does (you don't want to install *everything* from backports,
just select packages, but you do want to install everything from a single package
repository like mine, since that's the only reason you've added it).  I'm not
suggesting to use my repo, just explaining the difference here.

Thanks,

/mjt

> The following packages are installed:
> roy at moggy:~$ sudo dpkg -l | grep samba
> ii  libldb2:amd64                      2:2.9.1+samba4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1        amd64        LDAP-like embedded database - shared library
> ii  python3-ldb                        2:2.9.1+samba4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1        amd64        Python 3 bindings for LDB
> ii  python3-samba                      2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        Python 3 bindings for Samba
> ii  samba                              2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        SMB/CIFS file, print, and login server for Unix
> ii  samba-common                       2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   all          common files used by both the Samba server and client
> ii  samba-common-bin                   2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        Samba common files used by both the server and the client
> ii  samba-dsdb-modules:amd64           2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        Samba Directory Services Database
> ii  samba-libs:amd64                   2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        Samba core libraries
> ii  samba-vfs-modules                  2:4.20.5+dfsg-1~bpo12+1                   amd64        Samba Virtual FileSystem plugins (transitional package)
> 
> So not sure why it is trying to install samba-ad-dc and samba-ad-provision as this is a member server not a DC.    (I  tried it on another member server with the same result).
> 
> Any advice how to proceed please?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Roy