From nobody Sun Feb 02 18:06:45 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YmHg36GfTz5mc8Z for ; Sun, 02 Feb 2025 18:08:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R10" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YmHg34gGTz43DW; Sun, 02 Feb 2025 18:08:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1738519695; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ml1S2Vx86wNns0hxpccnDWnie8fObqIvDF/3bgd/Ug4=; b=drYWPuaZMvOJnvWXKv6UGqsjgA7gE/9XfRcb+C3TFYzaEYnIeR8o3jBuoOEGSwz8NumgUX /RAvcsoEWMa/u0Af9Hvpf4M8OGBcOSyYEMDsxllBhBbqkl0RpE24rCucYwweP6qtNdNTZg xR2+yMfevvnnRRfm/CbKu43RHPjPKpHEhp6jO4gSSCW75RlrQdZygDKFAT918uQX6ThjyC gwqCAFzpcEg62FZ5cqVt11oa+dUxvWz2kmNivFMfYSBGWR7H0Vpu+Oec6aD9fsNLR4Snp9 Iq7kJfuc37oHWM6KQKgXYJOO/84bOjVTDLBnAIFqQtgzKbhzUatRQkKjgNasUQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1738519695; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ml1S2Vx86wNns0hxpccnDWnie8fObqIvDF/3bgd/Ug4=; b=se/u2jzy/dvLA7/K3C56tRyuC46t+6vIN5bPe0MPD1D9RLtZp1Ek8epNMNQcVvIhr0U+Yj 5C3bGCDVB4flzXaM+uNWrrJfI/n2ErwqVfapijjE93htAL+2t5zGN/kVazRbCGNP60IsMS Q9DXcKR/6AlzRG/Uj2NRLCyNd8Uz3D0MwIC71P1BL8AMzygCTYXDXvtdmy+osniURuyqiQ 6qmZW99kXz4Aq0paPEexzWxLENRwoq8sxnOtDWNYm/UyNcYbnTELsQkvyBmx1Da7Vg5w3W kOiG0wKP1eKAvYfqGE0TZdukevKwTk/d9U3iZLo9uWW05WcPnJ/lPJCfdK5k9g== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1738519695; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=lc/H1FoQ27fRMfHNtF3QE6UiD1dlUizgrZK2RA0PhFXwA1P2BlYVooAhJZZDYe6S5YWIQZ TZnFmrwfvuwB/Cet+VDC/M2x07/7nii3ObTLTU51X2iPKeuc4CHbHEKaC3jQcXaNucFyj2 2Fua0V3xmLcnWQOI8d7MrmTud74XT5+Xx09Xfzb1wphKFD+lUlccGC5J7P6qsH9zeD76VM c9FWD8+qyGBTyT1hrTSRLWbQXLJtuqdLII/q1n827SvdWB7bmwzUkMu5LOsDpi9HkzIpUX 2G2SIGG6oCT++UG1Wx9lPOoqbRI6XVZ/Y/ONGNOuXgky+ihbQSzJkzo8iuielg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:240b:11:220:fe00::174:11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: yasu/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YmHg237xsznsK; Sun, 02 Feb 2025 18:08:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 03:06:45 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20250203.030645.406589481977955710.yasu@FreeBSD.org> To: kiwi@freebsd.org Cc: tatsuki_makino@hotmail.com, rkoberman@gmail.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Strange version inconsistency in Samba t* utils (e.g. talloc) From: Yasuhiro Kimura In-Reply-To: <1453319087.51758.1738487855881.JavaMail.zimbra@oav.net> References: <1453319087.51758.1738487855881.JavaMail.zimbra@oav.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.9 on Emacs 31.0.50 List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Xavier Beaudouin Subject: Re: Strange version inconsistency in Samba t* utils (e.g. talloc) Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 10:17:35 +0100 (CET) > I understand, but samba is really picky with their "satellite" libraries. > When you don't use them as embedded tools then you can have strange results > if the version it not the one needed. > For example, net/samba420 needs tdb >= 1.4.10, but other net/samba may not > work with this version. > > This is very unfortunate but also some other tools like sssd2 and sudo may > need this libraries as external when compiled with samba support. > > Kind regards, > Xavier > When net/samba420 was added, following ports were added as dependencies. * databases/tdb1410 * devel/talloc242 * devel/tevent016 But I think we should have taken following steps. 1. Repocopy databases/tdb, devel/talloc and devel/tevent to databases/tdb149, devel/talloc241 and devel/tevent015. 2. Update dependencies of net/samba416 and net/samba419 from the former to the latter. 3. Update databases/tdb, devel/talloc and devel/tevent to the versions that Smaba 4.20 requires. The reason is as following. Right now there are 3 Samba ports in ports tree. That is, * net/samba416 * net/samba419 * net/samba420 net/samba416 has already reached its EoL and net/samba419 security fixes only phase. So it is unlikely they requires update of dependecies. You may say it is also unlikely net/samba420 requires update. But when newer version of Samba, for example 4.21, has come to ports tree, it is very likely it requires newer version of dependencies and it is still possible net/samba420 works fine with versions required by 4.21 as is the case with net/samba416 and net/samba419. And when it really happens all we do is simply updating generic databases/tdb, devel/talloc and devel/tevent rather than creating new specific databases/tdbNNNN, devel/tallocNNN and devel/teventNNN ports and removing old ones. This is common practice in ports tree. And by following it we can minimize the frequency to create and remove port with specific version. --- Yasuhiro Kimura