[CentOS-devel] CentOS 4 Samba - More bugs (Was: Re: CentOS 4Samba - Excel 2002/2003 bug)

Ross S. W. Walker rwalker at medallion.com
Mon Feb 26 22:58:44 UTC 2007

> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-devel-bounces at centos.org 
> [mailto:centos-devel-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Mike Fedyk
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 5:54 PM
> To: The CentOS developers mailing list.
> Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 4 Samba - More bugs (Was: 
> Re: CentOS 4Samba - Excel 2002/2003 bug)
> Durval Menezes wrote:
> > Hello Folks,
> > 
> > FWI (and slightly OT), we have had no end of troubles with 
> the standard
> > 3.0.10-EL4 Samba RPMs, specially regarding MS SMS 
> installations. We have
> > fixed all of them just by upgrading to Samba 3.0.23d, 
> rebuilt (with a
> > simple "rpmbuild --rebuild") from the SRPM available at
> > 	http://ftp.sernet.de/pub/samba/src/samba3-3.0.23d-30.src.rpm
> > 
> > We have not yet tried the new 3.0.24 version, but we assume it would
> > work just as well.
> > 
> > If you use LDAP authentication, there's a change in the Samba schema
> > regarding indexing, mostly harmless but you will have to rebuild the
> > LDAP indexes using slapindex (it's on the Release Notes).
> > 
> > If the upstream vendor used more up-to-date versions of 
> some packages
> > (3.0.10 is more than 2 years obsolete, for example) I think 
> there would
> > be much less crying and gnashing of teeth, but them maybe 
> it would be
> > much less fun too :-)
> http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html
> Enterprise distributions like Red hat, Suse, Ubuntu LTS and 
> Debian all 
> take the stance of stability and backport any bug fixes as 
> they are needed.
> That said, looking at the changelog for the samba does not 
> show a lot of 
> bug fixes being backported and looking at the list of open bugs I see 
> several that are more than one year old and have been fixed 
> by using the 
> upstream source code instead.  One had a patch 10 months after the 
> initial report.  The original reporter refused to go back to 
> the distro 
> version because upstream was working fine.
> Am I only seeing the shadows or is it really as bad as the 1+ 
> year old 
> bug reports say?

I think the stable distros would be best served if they took
applications like, gnome, kde, apache, samba, etc. out of their main
repo and put them in a more dynamic repo that gets updated much more


This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list