Web lists-archives.com

Re: [Samba] self compiled 4.10.3 replication failure.




On Mon, 20 May 2019, Vincent S. Cojot via samba wrote:


On Mon, 20 May 2019, Tom Diehl via samba wrote:

 On Sat, 18 May 2019, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

 Well OK maybe I should have said self compiled using the instructions @
 https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Build_Samba_from_Source#configure and
 the package list from
 https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Package_Dependencies_Required_to_Build_Samba#Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_7_.2F_CentOS_7_.2F_Scientific_Linux_7
 substituting python36-devel for python-devel and adding python32-dns
 to get the samba-tool dns module to work. None of the distro samba
 packages are installed.

On the other hand, since python3 is a 'foreign' passenger to RHEL7, if you just wanted Samba 4.10.x on el7/centos7, it would be much simplier to just consume the python2 system default. This is what I'm doing on el7 to build without EPEL:
http://nova.polymtl.ca/~coyote/dist/samba/samba-4.10.3/RHEL7/SPECS/samba-v410x.spec
-----------------------------------------
% if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} > 7
% global with_python3 1
% else
% global with_python3 0
% endif
-----------------------------------------

So what happens when 4.11 is released? The release notes clearly state that
4.11 will not have python2 support. Doing as you suggest only kicks the can
down the road. My gut feeling is if I am going to stay with python2 I might as
well stay with 4.9. Honestly I would rather get this sorted out sooner than
later unless of course someone from the samba team says I am wasting my time.

At this point in time, I am not even sure my problem is related to the build.
I suspect the build is just fine but there is something else in play. The problem
is that there is nothing useful I can find in Google and so far no one has
thought of anything else to try troubleshoot the problem.

Different strokes for different folks suppose. :-)

Given that I have been running self compiled versions of samba in production
since 4.7.0 I am inclined to continue down that road. I agree that rpms might
be better but ansible does a great job ensuring I build all of my DC's the same
way each and every time.

Regards,

--
Tom			me@xxxxxxxxxx

--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba