Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
Alexander Skwar wrote: So sprach Buchan Milne am 2002-06-23 um 01:21:23 + : If there is a valid reason why a normal user (the rpmdrake-only-kind) needs this, fine, but if this is for some application which uses --nodeps or --force or relocates, I see no reason. The reason is, that it's not possible to upgrade to the -ldap (or the normal) releases by doing rpm -Uvh * / urpmi *. I just did a urpmi --auto-select which installed the non-ldap packages for me. Since I use LDAP, I need LDAP aware samba. So I rebuild it, and tried to upgrade to the -ldap packages. Just want to let you know that I am still working on this. On 8.2, your patch helps, but doesn't yet do what I want, which is allowing the user to select samba-server or samba-server-ldap (like with apache and apache-perl). This is for when we have the samba rpm building both normal and ldap RPMs simultaneously (hopefully). I have yet to test this on cooker, which is why I haven't got any further. Unfortunately all this work for ldap in samba-2.2.5 will be wasted once 3.0 comes out (with run-time configuration of passdb backends). There is also a patch to samba-2.2.5 that was announced today, which must go in, so we need a newer RPM anyway. Buchan -- |Registered Linux User #182071-| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
So sprach Buchan Milne am 2002-06-23 um 01:21:23 + : If there is a valid reason why a normal user (the rpmdrake-only-kind) needs this, fine, but if this is for some application which uses --nodeps or --force or relocates, I see no reason. The reason is, that it's not possible to upgrade to the -ldap (or the normal) releases by doing rpm -Uvh * / urpmi *. I just did a urpmi --auto-select which installed the non-ldap packages for me. Since I use LDAP, I need LDAP aware samba. So I rebuild it, and tried to upgrade to the -ldap packages. Hm, but I upgraded from 2.2.4, where there were no -ldap packages. If I had upgraded from 2.2.5-1mdk, this would not have happened. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de |Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 0 hours 5 minutes
Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
So sprach David Walser am 2002-06-22 um 16:33:45 -0700 : Well, vice versa would also have to be true, but Yes, of course. That's what my spec file does. what's the advantage of that? I see it as this being Easier upgrade path in both directions. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de |Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 0 hours 17 minutes
[Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
Hi! Well, subject says it all: Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict? Okay, I can see that both cannot be installed at the same time, but shouldn't e.g. samba-server-ldap simply obsolete samba-server? Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de |Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 5 days 4 hours 50 minutes
Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
So sprach Alexander Skwar am 2002-06-23 um 00:40:54 +0200 :
time, but shouldn't e.g. samba-server-ldap simply obsolete samba-server?
Attached is a diff to the 2.2.5-2mdk spec, which fixes this.
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english)
Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de |Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen
Uptime: 5 days 5 hours 39 minutes
--- samba.spec 2002-06-23 01:26:26.0 +0200
+++ samba.spec.obsoletes2002-06-23 01:26:27.0 +0200
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
%define ver 2.2.5
-%define rel 2mdk
+%define rel 2.9mdk
%define vscanver 0.2.5a
# 2.2.4 and 1 replace by samba-team at release
@@ -206,12 +206,13 @@
%if %build_ldap
%package server-ldap
Summary: Samba (SMB) server programs with LDAP (only) support
-Conflicts: samba-server
+Obsoletes: samba-server
+Provides: samba-server
Requires: samba-common-ldap = %{version}
%else
%package server
Summary: Samba (SMB) server programs.
-Conflicts: samba-server-ldap
+Obsoletes: samba-server-ldap
Requires: samba-common = %{version}
%endif
Group: Networking/Other
@@ -249,11 +250,12 @@
%if %build_ldap
%package common-ldap
Summary: Files used by both Samba servers and clients with LDAP support
-Conflicts: samba-common
+Obsoletes: samba-common
+Provides: samba-common
%else
%package common
Summary: Files used by both Samba servers and clients.
-Conflicts: samba-common-ldap
+Obsoletes: samba-common-ldap
%endif
Group: System/Servers
@@ -277,14 +279,16 @@
%if %build_ldap
%package swat-ldap
Summary: The Samba Web Administration Tool (with LDAP support)
-Conflicts: samba-swat
-Requires: samba-server-ldap = %{version} xinetd
+Obsoletes: samba-swat
+Provides: samba-swat
+Requires: samba-server-ldap = %{version}
%else
%package swat
Summary: The Samba Web Administration Tool.
-Conflicts: samba-swat-ldap
-Requires: samba-server = %{version} xinetd
+Obsoletes: samba-swat-ldap
+Requires: samba-server = %{version}
%endif
+Requires: xinetd
Group: System/Servers
Provides: samba-swat swat
@@ -306,12 +310,13 @@
%if %build_winbind %build_ldap
%package winbind-ldap
Requires: samba-common-ldap = %{version}
-Conflicts: samba-winbind
+Obsoletes: samba-winbind
+Provides: samba-winbind
%endif
%if %build_winbind !%build_ldap
%package winbind
Requires: samba-common = %{version}
-Conflicts: samba-winbind-ldap
+Obsoletes: samba-winbind-ldap
%endif
%if %build_winbind
Summary: Samba-winbind daemon, utilities and documentation
@@ -1161,6 +1166,12 @@
%endif
%changelog
+* Sat Jun 22 2002 Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2.5-2.9mdk
+- Don't make the -ldap packages Conflicts: with the normal packages,
+ but make them Obsoletes: each other. This doesn't make rpmlint happy if
+ the normal packages are built, since there'll be Obsoletes:'s without
+ Provides:'s, but that's exactly what I want
+
* Wed Jun 19 2002 Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2.5-2mdk
- Fix build on 8.1 (no nested conditionals)
- Make provision for newer Mandrake releases
Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
--- Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! Well, subject says it all: Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict? Okay, I can see that both cannot be installed at the same time, but shouldn't e.g. samba-server-ldap simply obsolete samba-server? Well, vice versa would also have to be true, but what's the advantage of that? I see it as this being like sendmail and postfix conflicting. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
Re: [Cooker] Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict?
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, subject says it all: Why do samba-PKG and samba-PKG-ldap conflict? Because it's too easy to break one smbd when you have two, and there doesn't seem to be any purpose to make it easy for people to break it. Okay, I can see that both cannot be installed at the same time, but shouldn't e.g. samba-server-ldap simply obsolete samba-server? Alexander Skwar Well, what's wrong with the current setup. If you aren't going to override rpm anyway (relocate or whatever), then you might as well --nodeps also. I also don't see any advantage to doing this (except maybe for migration from smbpasswd-ldap, but that's not really that much better?). There would be an advantage to packaging samba3-alphas (to get things like smbgroupedit, or run a DC with 3alpha, and file serving with 2.2.5), but of course that should go in something like /opt/samba3. And, what impact does obsoletes have on how packages are managed in the distro (for example, samba-2.2.4-?mdk only got removed when I added the conflicts, so this might result in removing all of samba - except of course client, nss_wins and doc ;-)). If there is a valid reason why a normal user (the rpmdrake-only-kind) needs this, fine, but if this is for some application which uses --nodeps or --force or relocates, I see no reason. These packages upgrade 8.0, 8.1, and 8.2 fine, and it's a lot more work getting that all working than just for cooker, so there should be a good reason to implement something like this (just in case samba decides to have another 2.2.x release). I would much rather spend time making it easier to -setup winbind (such as in DrakX), maybe with integrated pam_mount to use existing network shares as homedirs -setup samba with ldap and/or migrate from smbpasswd (testing idealx tools which are now in the samba tree, maybe new subpackage for them) -provide samba3-alphas -test more virus scanners -put more examples in smb.conf (ldap in ssl and tls, with working password changing, samba as pdc/bdc with ldap) -test and add new features (libsmbclient, --with-winbind-auth) Buchan
