[Pkg-samba-maint] samba4 packages

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:26:36PM +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 11:10 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-02-16 at 13:24 +0000, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2013-02-16 at 11:23 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > > > Quoting Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer at debian.org):
> > > > 
> > > > > Now that samba 4.0 has been released, we should get rid of the samba4
> > > > > source package for jessie and just have all of its binary packages be
> > > > > built from the samba source package. We discussed ways of doing this
> > > > > before, but I don't think there is a clear plan yet?
> > > > 
> > > > The plan is mostly "wait until wheezy is released but also plan to
> > > > work on this at SambaXP in May".
> > > I think Andrew is keen on working on it before then. :) I'm happy to
> > > wait for wheezy to be released before moving onto this.
> > 
> > Yes, I'm hoping to work on this much sooner than that.  
> > 
> > As an upstream developer, it remains a source of considerable
> > frustration that I have to tell our users that there is no, not even
> > experimental or PPA, package of Samba 4.0 as released, for any major
> > distribution.  Instead, we have a situation where on Red Hat based
> > systems the DC is deliberately removed, and on Debian based systems the
> > smbd file server is deliberately removed.  (Corrections on this point
> > welcome).
> > 
> > I know there are very good reasons, but I'm still not very happy about
> > that, because building a complete product only to have major components
> > removed by our distributors only causes major frustration all around. 
> > 
> > Furthermore, others build on top of Samba, often also in Debian
> > packages, such as OpenChange and SoGo, so our users are particularly
> > frustrated when I tell them they must build from source, because then
> > their other packages won't cleanly install.
> > 
> > Additionally, I work on NETGEAR's ReadyNAS, and it's no secret that this
> > is a Debian box inside.  While it is quite practical to maintain private
> > packages (and this is done), much of the advantage of being based on
> > Debian comes from the integration of many packages.  That means being as
> > close to upstream as possible is worth spending time on.  For NETGEAR
> > that means ensuring a good Samba 4.0 package is eventually available in
> > upstream Debian, for the file server at least.
> > 
> > Adding in my desire to have the AD DC correctly and fully packaged, this
> > means I've decided to try and work on a combined package.  My hope is
> > that experimental can then be a suitable home for that package.  
> > 
> > Now that the 4.0.3 package is out, I'll get back to my combined
> > packaging work I started a few months back and see what I can manage in
> > terms of a total package.  My hope is that then our users who want to
> > run the AD DC can then run this package, and get the whole of Samba, as
> > released by the Samba Team.
> 
> I've uploaded my first cut at a package (git diff attached) to my
> website:
> 
> http://abartlet.net/samba4-debian/
> 
> I realise there is much, much more to do, but I wanted to upload my
> progress so far, in the hope I can collaborate with any interested
> parties.  It isn't tested in any way so far, but it shows my first stab
> at integrating the two packages.  From here, we will need to rename
> samba4 to samba-ad-dc if we wish to keep the components split in any
> way, or finish merging in the package parts. 
> 
> (I realise this isn't much more than I did a few months back, but at
> least it is now rebased on 4.0.3).
Thanks!

I haven't looked at this in detail yet, but I think it should probably done
the other way around. This integrates the Samba 3 packages into the 'samba4'
source package, while we want to keep the 'samba' source package and integrate
the samba4 components into that.

Cheers,

Jelmer