[Pkg-samba-maint] samba4 packages

Thu Feb 21 11:55:42 UTC 2013

On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 09:02 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 21:35 +0000, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 08:12 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 14:09 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > > 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.
> > > 
> > > The package is now called 'samba' at the top of 'debian/control'.  The
> > > result is a massive merge of the two.
> > It's based off the samba4 source package as far as I can tell; the
> > changelog is the samba4 changelog, and the debdiff is against the samba4
> > package?
> 
> I'll redo those against the samba package today. 

I looked into this, but the 'samba' repo is a bzr repo, and this seems
to have a very different layout to a git package, even when pulled in
over git-bzr.  

I can of course just prepare patches and commits on copy of a initial
copy of the current state of that tree, but could someone prepare me a
'correct' base git tree to work from?

That way, when I get back to this mid next week, I can do a bit more
proper job of it.

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org