[Pkg-samba-maint] Help needed with Samba 4.0.5 package

[Andrew Bartlett]

Ivo De Decker <ivo.dedecker at ugent.be> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 09:34:34AM +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>> > I imported the tarballs samba_4.0.0+dfsg1 and samba_4.0.3+dfsg1
>tarballs from
>> > previous samba4 uploads into the repo and created a new
>samba_4.0.5+dfsg1
>> > tarball. I don't have a good git-import-orig workflow for this yet.
>Maybe
>> > someone can point me at a good workflow to manage repackaging
>upstream
>> > tarballs. It would be nice if the samba upstream release process
>would strip
>> > out the non-free files before creating the tarball. That would save
>us the
>> > work of repackaging them. Do you think this is something that could
>be
>> > considered? 
>> 
>> If it were that easy, we would.  The 'non-free' files are of course
>> RFCs, which contain tables which are extracted by our build process. 
>As
>> the Debian package uses Heimdal from the system, the problem is
>punted
>> to the Heimdal maintainer.  That is the only reason the build works
>with
>> these files removed. 
>
>The samba heimdal package has a script to extract the tables from the
>RFC and
>only ships the extracted table. Could something like that be considered
>for
>samba?
>
>> Thanks, I've now build with that configuration.  The only thing I
>> couldn't do is inject CC="ccache gcc" into it, as far as I can tell. 
>I
>> use that to speed up builds a little.
>
>my .git/gbp.conf has this:
>
>[DEFAULT]
># the default build command:
>#builder = debuild -i -I
>builder = debuild -i -I -us -uc -j12
>
>You could replace the builder with a wrapper which calls ccache.
>
>
>> From here, I think we need to address the three TODO commits, sort
>out
>> the debconf mess and the upgrade/prerm/postint scripts.  I would very
>> much appreciate assistance with that.
>
>I fixed the debconf stuff for now, by moving the templates to the right
>names
>for the current packages. This version builds and installs fine. Just
>running
>the 'samba' package (with smbd and nmbd) is fine. The samba-ad-dc
>package
>installs fine now too, but I didn't get it to work (probably because I
>never
>tried running the samba4 ad dc before).
>
>We should think about the naming of the packages and the init scripts.
>The
>'samba' package doesn't ship the 'samba' daemon, and the 'samba' init
>script
>doesn't control this daemon. Looking at the history, this is expected,
>but it
>gets confusing very quickly.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Ivo

Thanks, I did the same with the templates and got it to build also.

In terms of the rfc stuff, at this point I would rather leave this to debian, as a debian-specific issue.

There may be no value in having the ad-DC package separate, but then the conf steps need to be merged.

Eventually we will probably have samba start the right things in all situations upstream.
-- 
Andrew Bartlett
Samba Developer.

Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity and any amusing auto corrections.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20130512/77e6591c/attachment.html>