Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 08:55:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@puchar.net> To: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, timur@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Future of Samba again Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1809040854450.17046@puchar.net> In-Reply-To: <7ab44e8e-6103-d5c4-062c-07d710451823@netfence.it> References: <7ab44e8e-6103-d5c4-062c-07d710451823@netfence.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> this old thread: > >> http://linux-unix-open-source.1053819.n5.nabble.com/Future-of-SAMBA-on-FreeBSD-td5932128.html well i still use 3.6.25 :) > > > > > I'm currently using several 4.6 installations, some NT DC, some AD DC, some > DC members either in base or in jails on UFS or ZFS and these will need > upgrading. > Also, I'm probably deploying a new AD domain which will need a DC and a > fileserver member (both in jails). > > So I'm wondering... > > > > > > Since I used this hack (1) when provisioning the AD DCs in a jails on ZFS, > will I encounter problems when I upgrade them? > >> (1) >> http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/Help-provisioning-a-Samba-AD-in-a-jail-on-ZFS-td6218355.html > > > > > > When provisioning a new AD DC on ZFS, would the above hack still work if > using Samba? > Seems not with 4.7 according to (2)... > What about 4.8? > >> (2) https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225676 > > > > > Also, I'm tempted to skip 4.7 completely and move to 4.8 directly; not that > I'd get any advantage that I know of, but that would buy me around six months > more, before I have to go through this all again. > Any showstopper? > > bye & Thanks > av. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1809040854450.17046>