[Pkg-samba-maint] Proposal: Repository for fast-paced package backports
L.P.H. van Belle
belle at bazuin.nl
Fri Dec 28 16:08:50 GMT 2018
Hai Mathieu and others.
Thanks for the responce..
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Mathieu Parent (Debian) [mailto:sathieu at debian.org]
> Verzonden: vrijdag 28 december 2018 7:07
> Aan: L.P.H. van Belle
> CC: debian-release at lists.debian.org; W. Martin Borgert;
> debian-devel at lists.debian.org;
> debian-backports at lists.debian.org; Debian Samba Maintainers
> Onderwerp: Re: Proposal: Repository for fast-paced package backports
>
> (Please reply to pkg-samba-maint only)
>
> Le jeu. 27 déc. 2018 à 11:00, L.P.H. van Belle
> <belle at bazuin.nl> a écrit :
> >
> >
> > Hai,
>
> Hi,
>
> > A very interesting thread this, since im doing this already
> for samba, my comments..
> > If i may ..
> >
> > Im running a samba repo now for jessie and stretch. ( and
> ubuntu 18.04 )
> > I really needed newer samba packages and i was not able to
> get them uploaded to unstable.
> > So i decided to build them myself and share them.
>
> This is different here. Samba is not in backport because of lack of
> time from my side (or other members of the team).
Yes, i know that. This is explained to me.
This is also why im maintaining these on my personal repo.
The debian steps where to difficult to follow, i do like you new instructions @gitlab
All on my todo for next year.
>
> I think that Samba perfectly fits in backport, as the version in
> testing is already the latest upstream.
Yes, i saw you updated to the 4.9.4. and yes, 4.9.4 is the one that needs backporting officially.
Maybe wait for 4.9.5 but 4.9.4 with patch is good.
How you are updating now and keeping up the pace currently really, Thumps up!
I also hope that, me, providing some info to the bug list, works for you atm.
I hoped to be able help you more out, but this year was .. well.
Lets say very stormy for me, some might know that. At least some at the samba list know.
So, new targets for coming year and hope things get better.
>
> > And now people are more and more using my samba package
> over the official debian package.
> > Because the newer version are build against debian stable
> or oldstable, and people can choose there upgrade.
>
> Do you have any stats here? How many download each month? How many
> different source IPs? per dist, per samba version?
I had a repo name change in augustus, so its not 100% but it gives you an idea.
Month Unique visitors Number of visits Pages Hits Bandwidth
jan-18 260 2,226 4,767 14,429 1.11 GB
feb-18 342 2,279 4,883 13,429 1.51 GB
mar-18 328 2,637 5,776 16,146 1.31 GB
apr-18 305 2,638 6,147 15,126 1.14 GB
may-18 434 3,325 7,369 16,958 1.12 GB
jun-18 429 3,14 9,216 18,078 1.21 GB
jul-18 525 3,634 13,661 22,571 1.42 GB
aug-18 619 4,65 24,158 35,254 2.18 GB
sep-18 401 2,764 17,24 22,824 1.44 GB < for some reason my cron stop producing my stats.
Oct-18 0 0 0 0 0 < started half sept, untill half nov.
nov-18 470 3,017 13,202 18,818 2.11 GB <
dec-18 995 8,429 32,611 44,316 4.03 GB
Total 5,108 38,739 139,03 237,949 18.57 GB
So daily about 250-300 uniq ip's.
>From about 7 sept until now, about 1450 uniq ip's for all samba/stretch packages.
I cant tell exact numbers on which version, but 4.8.x is most popular, and now quickly going up 4.9.x
Uniq ipnumbers, for Jessie averages in about
4.5 : 120
4.6 : 110
4.7 : 140
4.8 : 220
I dont to 4.9 for jessie because if people want 4.9 you must run stretch, simple.
Uniq ipnumbers,Stretch averages in :
4.5 : 320
4.6 : 501
4.7 : 479
4.8 : 784
4.9 : 531
.. Offtopic Ubuntu bionic samba 4.9(.3 and .4) amd64 only: 174
A quick generated stats with goaccess:
Have a look here : https://apt.van-belle.nl/report.html
These numbers will change after 1 jan because then im closing the old repo names.
I had a repo name change in augustus so it was bit easier to maintain and update.
>
> > If the might be a fast-lane repo, why not per package version.
> > This way we can keep the changes to other packages small
> and limited.
> >
> > What i now now do.
> > I have 4 repo's for jessie, jessie-samba45 jessie-samba46
> jessie-samba47 jessie-samba48
> > I have 4 repo's for stretch, stretch-samba46
> stretch-samba47 stretch-samba48 stretch-samba49
> > (And for the ubuntu supporters a samba49 in amd64 only.)
>
> So, you have 9 repos. How long does it takes to update all those when
> a security fix comes?
This depends a bit, normaly the same or next day for debian stable/latest samba.
A bit like this.
1-2 days for stable ( debian stretch ) / Latest samba ( from samba.org or with patches from debian maintainers )
1-7 days for oldstable ( debian jessie ) / Latest samba ( from samba.org or with patches from debian maintainers )
For example, i did make a 4.5.16 and integrated the CVE patches from debian's samba 4.5.12. (this was a special request from a user at the samba list.)
I had to wait for the patches from Debian for this one.
I follow what i can maintain.
But most of the time, i can produce the stretch with latest samba within a day when i get the notice.
And Mathieu, without you and the samba team im not able todo this, really, i do depend on Debian maintainers also.
You and the Team are showing me the examples or howto change things.
You made the : README.source.md, so apriciated, this one, helped me a lot.
Why this.
The samba update pace makes upgrading samba on debian much harder then needed.
Totaly understandable since we dont want production servers to fail and try to avoid behaivior changes.
Which is impossible with the changes between 4.2 - 4.5 So many things changed.
Upgrades from jessie (4.2) to stretch ( 4.5 ) where failing, we got these messages on the samba list.
Easy to fix but so nasty when your upgrading the OS.
This had all todo with the smb.conf and default setting changes and as extra jessie => stretch was the sysv to systemd move,
which gave also problems, etc. This is these days much better.
Only now the same problem is created for the stretch to buster upgrade. 4.5 - 4.8/4.9.
Or worse samba 4.2 (jessie) to buster 4.? .9 .10?
All i wanted to provide was an upgrade path for the users, so they could choose upgrade from jessie to stretch, with the preffered samba version.
With some step howto avoid and fix this.
Currently how I see things, for the coming buster..
My packages 4.9, have gluster, spotlight and vfs_nfs4acl_xattr as extra enabled.
My packages 4.7(and 4.8), have gluster as extra enabled.
Debian (4.9.x) , has gluster, no spotlight, no vfs_nfs4acl_xattr.
Ubuntu (4.7.x) , no gluster, no spotlight, no vfs_nfs4acl_xattr.
Spotlight, gluster and the vfs_nfs4acl_xattr are imo really needed in the buster release.
Spotlight, because there are a lot of apple users that like to use there samba as TimeMachine backup.
GlusterFS, because its used and getting more used.
Nfs4acl, because without it, running samba with kerberized nfsv4 ( what i run ) is really hard.
And because of that all, im having so much different samba repo's. (in time this will be lesser again.)
Why the fastlane for samba.
If a user chooses stretch-samba48, they will stay samba 4.8 until they change the repo..
Or if debian stretch samba gets a higher number, which is in this case impossible.
If stretch is updated to buster, samba is upgraded only if the debian version is higher.
This is also why i use the debian settings as much as possible.
I've never noticed behavior changes with a samba release, like 4.8.0 upto 4.8.8 etc.
So what my update/grade path. Same as : https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Release_Planning
And people where trying to (re-)build from source/debian and ended up on the samba list.
And last, I have one change for you Mathieu, this one needs to be in the 4.9.4 packages..
In debian/ctdb.dirs add these folders. ( state persistent volatile, must be created first now )
var/log/ctdb
var/lib/ctdb/state
var/lib/ctdb/persistent
var/lib/ctdb/volatile
And to everybody,
Happy new year, lets make the best of it.
Best regards,
Louis
More information about the Pkg-samba-maint
mailing list