Andrew- After git-building the package with your debian directory (as it was at about 9:00 AM UTC-0600), I installed it and started comparing it to the package I had crafted.
There are a large number of differences, but almost all of them seem to stem from the work-arounds I implemented to cope with my lack of knowledge in package crafting. For instance, with the samba4_4.0.3+dfsg1-0.1 debian that we started with, certain variables and paths were not expanding properly which led to build failures; I remedied this problem by changing the install paths and associated rules. It was barbaric methodology, but it did eventually pan out. Other than that though, our packages seem to both function (though one morning of light usage is not a fair trial); though I'm glad to have a proper install thanks to the git tree you linked. One difference though that will matter is that wafsamba.py does not properly expand python as an environment variable when it preforms substitution on the interpreter line for samba_dnsupdate, samba_kcc, samba_spnupdate and samba_upgradedns. The interpreter line as is, will read "#!/usr/bin/python2.7# vim: expandtab" which causes the 'bad interpreter' error when invoked. Changing wafsamba.py as follows seems to fix the issue: if task.env["PYTHON"][0] == "/": - replacement_shebang = "#!%s" % task.env["PYTHON"] + replacement_shebang = "#!%s\n" % task.env["PYTHON"] else: - replacement_shebang = "#!/usr/bin/env %s" % task.env["PYTHON"] + replacement_shebang = "#!/usr/bin/env %s\n" % task.env["PYTHON"] I'm rebuilding the package I made available previously with the up-to-date debian folder as well as that newline fix and my unofficial exclude ip patch. Thanks much for the help, Mike Ray -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
