svn commit: r504590 - in head/net: samba46 samba47 samba48

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 02:17:56PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 01:23:34 +0200 "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur at freebsd.org>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 at 22:50, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >> Le 29 juin 2019 20:40:53 GMT+02:00, "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur at bat.ru> a
> >> écrit :
> >>> Tonight I hope to commit 4.10 port.
> >>
> >> It does not solve rhe pb, staying on the legacy libs is the solution, as I
> >> said even fedora is on the legacy
> >>
> > I've committed net/samba410.
> > 
> > My view on the situation is that all the ports, which use
> > devel/{talloc,tevent}, databases/tdb should keep
> > using them, unless they are broken by using them(but that shouldn't happen,
> > API still should remain
> > the same. The biggest difference is the drop of the dependency on Python27,
> > as far as I can see.
> > 
> > New Samba port doesn't use external databases/ldb*, so security/sssd may
> > use any of those freely now.
> > 
> > The samba4[47] are outdated and should disappear in the middle of the
> > August.
> > 
> > The samba48 will remain for a while, but not for long, as samba411 us
> > pushing from behind. It'll be (hopefully)
> > the only consumer of the talloc1/tevent1/tdb1 ports, which should disappear
> > together with Samba 4.8.
> > 
> > In general I'd prefer to see SAMBA_DEFAULT to be bumped to 410, but this is
> > up to the portmgr.
> 
> 4.8 goes EoL upstream mid-September (about 2 weeks before Q4), so
> making 4.10 now would be good, but I believe it's just too late for
> that.  A port like this needs at least a few weeks of wider testing
> before it can be pushed to users of the quarterly branches who expect
> more stability.
> 
> Since you said that the new libs are API compatible, is it possible to
> make 4.8 use the new libs?  If not, then all non-samba consumers will
> have to switch to the legacy libs.  They can be switched back after the
> 2019Q3 branch has been created (together with making 4.10 the default
> which probably needs an exp-run).

It is and I tried to build everything with the new lib. the problem I am stuck
with is the following, to have ldb12 building with new talloc, I need to build
it without python, but I don't know what is the impact of that to end users.

My understading is any samba should be able to run with any ldb version which
makes me wonder why we have that many version in the tree instead of always the
latest one.

For the set of library yes they are fully backward compatible according to:
https://abi-laboratory.pro/index.php?view=timeline&l=talloc
https://abi-laboratory.pro/index.php?view=timeline&l=tevent
https://abi-laboratory.pro/index.php?view=timeline&l=tdb

the problem is on the python binding if any.

The current situation is a big mess for end users of those libraries!

Best regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-all/attachments/20190702/09c0bea1/attachment.sig>