On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 23:28 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:00 PM Dario Lesca <d.lesca@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 09.03 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha > > scritto: > > > > Can the Fedora samba maintainers do that? > > > > > > > > Thank > > > > > > > > > > They are very welcome to my work. > > > > > > > Then why do not use your samba.spec for build official samba > > package at > > least on Fedora? > > Because the last 3 times I tried to start submitting packages > directly > to Fedora I found the process very burdensome and frustrating, and > got > no meaningful help when I asked. I can help you here as I'm a Fedora packager maintainer . > Also, it seemed clear that actually > building Samba with Heimdal Kerberos was unwelcome to Fedora or Red > Hat. And the last time I spoke with any of the authors of Kerberos > about the mess, it took them a while to stop laughing about the mess. > And yes, I know a bunch of the original authors socially, though not > professionally. Have you Pull request and BugZilla reports with that information > > It already contain the MIT or Heimdal Kerberos flag: > > > > %global with_system_mit_krb5 0 > > > > Is sufficient set it to '1' for default packaging and who wants to > > use > > heimdal can rebuild it setting this flag to '0' via line command > > > > This is another way to resolve this issue > > > > Thanks > > Well, yes. That's why I publish the suite. I was under the strong > impression that it wouldn't be welcome due to the announced desire > "not to support another Kerberos" in Fedora or for Red Hat as a > company. But since it works, works well, and Samba supports it, I'll > continue to publish the updates for a while. I admit that my > packaging > relies extensively on Rawhide for updates, and I do resync > occasionally for maximum compatibility. > > If anyone can resolve the Kerberos discrepancies and get full domain > controller working well for Samba with MIT Kerberos, I'll be happy to > congratulate them and buy them beer or maybe even dinner. That is the (only) way > I''m in the > Boston area, and hey, maybe I even know them. I admit that I > anticipate that, with the recent purchase by IBM, that FreeIPA will > be > dropped as a non-viable project, which would allow a a switch to > Heimdal based Kerberos with a future Fedora release. Since FreeIPa's > creation in 2007, I've not seen a single case where Samba, especially > Samba in collaboration with Active Directory, wasn't a better choice. > > But I could be wrong. I've only been publishing Samba ports and > working with it professionally since..... 1993? In networks up of to > 13,000 servers? So what do I know? > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
