Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
i have recently installed sarge and updated it to etch in order to put the latest samba release on it.
to save me reinstalling another pc (as we're talking works time here) to test my theory, in future would i be able to install the stable distro and add the latest samba package to it by means of a command like this:
#apt-get -t sarge-backports install samba
yes or no will do as i realise i could spend the morning installing a debian machine and testing it for myself...
You would need to add the backports repos per the instructions at http://backports.org. Backports is always behind Sid by a little while, but it is more stable.
debian:/# apt-get -t sarge-backports install samba
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
samba-common
Suggested packages:
samba-doc
The following NEW packages will be installed:
samba samba-common
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 4557kB of archives.
After unpacking 11.3MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n
Abort.
debian:/# apt-get -t sarge-backports install samba
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
samba-common
Suggested packages:
samba-doc
The following NEW packages will be installed:
samba samba-common
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 4557kB of archives.
After unpacking 11.3MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org stable/main samba-common 3.0.14a-3sarge1 [2005kB]
Get:2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org stable/main samba 3.0.14a-3sarge1 [2552kB]
Fetched 4557kB in 1m39s (45.7kB/s)
Preconfiguring packages ...
Selecting previously deselected package samba-common.
(Reading database ... 74192 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking samba-common (from .../samba-common_3.0.14a-3sarge1_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package samba.
Unpacking samba (from .../samba_3.0.14a-3sarge1_i386.deb) ...
Setting up samba-common (3.0.14a-3sarge1) ...
Setting up samba (3.0.14a-3sarge1) ...
Generating /etc/default/samba...
TDBSAM version too old (0), trying to convert it.
TDBSAM converted successfully.
Starting Samba daemons: nmbd smbd.
debian:/#
debian:/# dpkg -l samba samba-common
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-=========================-=========================-==================
ii samba 3.0.14a-3sarge1 a LanManager-like file and printer server for Unix
ii samba-common 3.0.14a-3sarge1 Samba common files used by both the server and the client
debian:/#
You are just installing the old version of samba. -t tells APT to *prefer* a particular release through apt-pinning. It can't find sarge-backports and just installs the normal sarge version.
ajdlinux wrote:Sarge-backports is part of backports.org - it's not actually pure Debian.
no but for the most part my distribution will be unchanged, which is really what i wanted. i find the older samba releases cause noise in windows event logs when using ads auth.
i would still prefer to do the backport than install from source or upgrade the whole distro to testing. i find source installs are a bit of a pain to manage once on.
ajdlinux wrote:You are just installing the old version of samba. -t tells APT to *prefer* a particular release through apt-pinning. It can't find sarge-backports and just installs the normal sarge version.
And /etc/apt/preferences should look something like this:
By default, for packages that exist in both of these repositories, apt will choose the version in the release with the higher pin-priority.
The Debian Documentation website contains the FAQ, Installation Manual and the Release Notes for Etch. They're helpful if you want to learn more about debian!
I've never used backports, i read Tina's howto and went to the backports site. I was just wondering if by commenting everything except the backports line in the sources.list, doing an update and then:
# apt-get install mozilla-firefox
would work?
This apt-pinning seems creepy to me.
Devuan Jessie - IceWM - vimperator - no DM
KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid
As long as backports has all the packages required by mozilla-firefox then yep that will worky.
I use to just keep lines in my sources file for stable, testing and unstable and when I was trying to grab the latest XYZ I would uncomment unstable and try to install it and if it looked like it was a mess then I would comment unstable back out, uncomment testing, apt-get update and try again, and then repeat for stable if needed.
But apt-pinning is not that difficult to use or understand it just SEEMS cryptic and as such sort of creeepy
fyi-samba in sarge is 3.0.14 i think and backports is only at 3.0.22 or about I believe.... Does that really make a difference?
It is really simple, once you get past the cryptic pin preference voodooo! Basically you are setting your most favorite, favorite, and least favorite. Normally it will pull from your most favorite, you use apt the same as you always have. But if something isn't in your most fav repo then it will go down the line and if it finds it in another then it will pull it in. Or you can tell it to go ahead and go for the version in your leasty favorite repo....
You simply need to add the -t sarge-backports option to apt-get when you want the backports, just copy and paste the prefs file that jobezone wrote - once you do that it's as easy as a small command line option.
I dont (well didnt) like it either. Like you said it was creepy but after playing with it a while I found it gave me more options/choices without screwing with the normal method of operations. pretty cool if a bit creepy! Nothing wrong with commenting out and updating and rinse and repeat but THAT is actually more complicated and confusing than pinning.
But at least we all get to choose which way we want to do it instead of a company and board dictating to us how we will do something or not do something. I love it...
-t isnt the only way to use pinning the /flavor is also interesting - btw
It is really simple, once you get past the cryptic pin preference voodooo! Basically you are setting your most favorite, favorite, and least favorite. Normally it will pull from your most favorite, you use apt the same as you always have. But if something isn't in your most fav repo then it will go down the line and if it finds it in another then it will pull it in. Or you can tell it to go ahead and go for the version in your leasty favorite repo....