Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Samba Jessie-backport
On Fri, 2016-05-13 at 18:53 +0000, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> Hi Leopold,
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:19:56AM +0200, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda
> wrote:
> > the current version of Samba in Jessie doesn't not work fine with
> > Windows 10.
> >
> > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-September/193886.html
> >
> > I think that backporting the current Stretch version of Samba to
> > Jessie
> > (supporting Windows 10) could be a good option. I'm not able to
> > evaluate the
> > cost in time about this option. Looking build dependencies I see
> > that there
> > are three packages that are not in Jessie and not maintained by the
> > Debian
> > Samba Maintainers:
> >
> > * libnss-wrapper libresolv-wrapper libsocket-wrapper
> >
> > and some packages with not available versions but maintained by the
> > same team:
> >
> > * libldb-dev (>= 2:1.1.26~)
> > libtalloc-dev (>= 2.1.6~)
> > libtdb-dev (>= 1.3.8~)
> > python-ldb (>= 2:1.1.26~)
> > python-ldb-dev (>= 2:1.1.26~)
> > python-talloc-dev (>= 2.1.6~)
> > python-tdb (>= 1.3.8~)
> >
> > So, please could you consider to backport Samba to Jessie to solve
> > the problem
> > of Windows 10 compatibility?
>
> Unfortunately we can't do this at the moment. The Samba
> packaging team in Debian is low on time, and we already struggle to
> keep all packages in the archive up to date when security fixes
> are released.
>
> Backports of Samba would indeed be great, and are regularly
> requested.
> Help would be great.
I totally agree. Hopefully getting 4.2.12 into jessie will however
address the specific issues. Patches to prepare such a package are
most welcome also.
That said, the provision of a backport by experienced and responsive
maintainers would also be great, because there is much we on the Samba
Team have improved beyond the 4.2 series.
Debian backports are not something that we on the Samba Packaging team
can take on - we are already over-committed, and that would mean the
backport becomes stale. Indeed, this is the primary reason why I
didn't prepare such a backport when I was in the big debian push around
the security update.
The best way to address that is probably for those who wish to see
Samba packaging improved to join us and so share the workload. With
that help, it would give us some capacity to supervise backport work
being done by, and committed to continuing by, others.
I hope this clarifies things.
Andrew Bartlett--
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
Reply to: