[Pkg-samba-maint] Re: What is blocking a Samba4 Tech Preview?

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:55:00AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote about 'Re: What is blocking a Samba4 Tech Preview?':
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 03:42:04PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 03:52:02AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > >> There currently is an upgrade script that reads in a Samba3 smb.conf
> > >> file and the various Samba3 TDB files and writes out the appropriate
> > >> Samba4 data files. I guess you'd be using these in upgrades. 
> > > Ok.  Does the current packaging use this? :-)
> > No, currently it doesn't. I'm a bit unsure if we really want to make the
> > samba4 packages direct upgrades from samba, though (ie. calling them just
> > "samba" with a version number of 3.9.something), given that a downgrade would
> > be downright impossible... This is definitely your call, though; we could
> > probably adjust the packaging to match names more properly (giving direct
> > upgrades) if there's a desire for it.
> Does having them installed under a different package name make it easier for
> the user to downgrade?  Isn't the best-case downgrade process in both cases
> going to be "uninstall the samba4 version of the package, manually massage
> your config back into a usable state (or restore from backup), and install
> the samba3 version"?  If so, I see no reason to not begin supporting direct
> upgrades (and debugging them).
The upgrade process can be run from postinst (the upgrade scripts can run
without user interaction). The only way to do a downgrade is indeed
copying smb.conf and the various TDB files from a backup, so I that 
means the samba 4 packages should backup the current smb.conf
and *.tdb before converting so users can use those to do a downgrade
(with the appropriate notes in NEWS.Debian, of course). Also, these versions
can not co-exist so that would not be a reason to allow concurrent
installs.

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 03:45:28PM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > I'm currently using the following format: 3.9.0+SVN12312-1, does that
> > sound sane to you?
> As long as we know samba will never reach 3.9.1 before it reaches 4.0, yes.
> :)
I've renamed the packages.

Cheers,

Jelmer

-- 
Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at samba.org> - http://jelmer.vernstok.nl/
Currently playing: Alanis Morissette - Would Not Come
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20051220/21bfe887/attachment.pgp