How does everyone feel about the SerNet Samba.plus offering? Anyone used it?
https://www.sernet.de/en/sernet/

https://samba.plus/samba/

I'm thinking that could be a reasonable way to get newer Samba (With 
Domain Controller capabilities) as well as support the Samba effort 
(they claim to employ 5 of the core Samba developers)...

The basic subscription cost isn't bad, though I have no idea about the 
cost for their level 3 support which is most interesting (source code 
fixes coordinated with Red Hat)...


James Pulver
CLASSE Computer Group
Cornell University

On 06/07/2016 07:12 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On 6 June 2016 at 13:00, Rupert Kolb <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> are there any updates for samba4 ?
>>> At the moment in the repo is:
>>> samba4-4.2.10-6.el6_7.x86_64  from 13th of april.
>
> Those are some add-on libraries for depencencies of other software.
> They're not a full Samba 4.x.
>
>>> At download.samba.org is a updated version samba-4.2.12 from 2016-05-02 (one
>>> month ago!)
>>>
>>> As there are some bugs in 4.2.10, which seem to be solved in 4.2.12 (for
>>> instance: 'wbinfo -u' returns no users), I'm really interested in the
>>> updated version !!!
>>>
>>
>> You seem unfamiliar with how Scientific Linux ships software which is
>> causing you some confusion. Scientific Linux (SL) is built from the
>> git source code that Red Hat puts out for its Enterprise Linux (RHEL).
>> Red Hat does periodic updates to its software on a scale of 1 to 2
>> times a year but these upgrades may only backport fixes to the current
>> release number or may do a complete upgrade. [When a RHEL release
>> moves from various production stages which RHEL-6 just did, they only
>> backport major fixes.]
>
> And there's my work over at https://github.com/nkadel/samba4repo. I
> gave up backporting Samba 4 to RHEL 6 or SL 6 a while ago, the
> dependencies have gotten out of hand. But my tools provide a full
> domain controller. The RHEL upstream packages, even for RHEL 7 or for
> Fedora 23, refuse to do this because the funky "heimdal" library they
> use for Kerberos is incompatible with the base MIT Kerberos  built
> into and relied on by Samba domain controllers. So you can't just turn
> on the setting in the .spec file, because the option is not being
> tested with the samba RPM updtes.
>
> So, I wrote that repo and the wrappers in it.
>
>> So if you need SL to ship samba4-4.2.12 then you need to check to see
>> if there are existing bugs on the issues you need fixed in
>> http://bugzilla.redhat.com and also test out whenever RHEL-6.9beta
>> comes out to see if the bug was backported to it. Otherwise you may
>> need to look at Scientific Linux 7 and if it is fixed/updated in SL7.3
>
> Not gonna happen for RHEL 6. The base Samba 3.x in RHEL 6 and SL 6
> fairly good,and you'll need to update to RHEL 7 or SL 7 to get a
> really up-to-date Samba release with full domain controller
> replacement working.
>
>>
>>> Rupert
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen J Smoogen.