On 2015/08/21 23:52, Vadim Zhukov wrote: > 21 авг. 2015 г. 19:36 пользователь "Stuart Henderson" <st...@openbsd.org> > написал: > > > > On 2015/08/21 14:15, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > tl;dr: net/samba4 needs build tests on !(amd64). > > > > > > So, rc scripts are coming soon, Vadim is doing the testing in KDE land > > > (thanks!), I've tested all other ports, everything works as expected. > > > I got one glitch in gnome-control-center, where I could see the printers > > > exported by smb but the GUI hangs when looking for the drivers. I don't > > > think that samba4 is to blame. > > > > > > So that means that the switch will happen soon. I'll ask for a bulk > > > build with net/samba4 hooked, net/samba unhooked, and all ports bumped > > > and converted to net/samba4 use. > > > > > > Two points remain to be addressed: > > > > > > - replace immediately the content of net/samba directory with what is in > > > net/samba4, or keep net/samba4 until the dust settles? I have no > > > strong opinion about this. (Obviously, cvs history would end up in > > > the Attic.) > > > > Personally I'd just replace it (including for the test build), it is > > less work than moving all dependent ports to use net/samba4, and it's > > less work to back out of the update if we need to (EPOCH bump vs change > > a bunch of ports). > > You meant REVISION, right? :)
I do mean an EPOCH bump - just the one, in net/samba, and only if we move to 4.x there and later run into problems serious enough to be worth moving back to 3.x. But hopefully that won't happen (I certainly haven't run into problems using it for file-serving, though I haven't tested gvfs with it yet). > I think that keeping Samba 3 could help in migration. It shouldn't > survive this release cycle, but could help to debug cases like "it stopped > working after samba package update". 4 doesn't build with 3 installed, I haven't tried it the other way around but it wouldn't surprise me if the same applies, in which case keeping both of them is not really suitable for bulk build. > But to be honest, I think there should not be much issues after 3->4 > migration, except those already mentioned in Samba4 release notes. And > there is no real point in keeping net/samba4 history as it didn't go into > bulk builds anyway. ack.
