Re: Strange version inconsistency in Samba t* utils (e.g. talloc)

On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 10:08 AM Yasuhiro Kimura <yasu@freebsd.org> wrote:

> From: Xavier Beaudouin <kiwi@freebsd.org>
> 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
>

This explains what I am seeing, but one issue is that
bsd.default-versions.mk still shows EOL samba416 as the default version. Is
there a good reason that this has not been updated to either 419 or 420? I
obviously don't like running EOL versions, but I also fear that running
something other than the default will break a port dependent on it. I
assume that maintiners more aware of these issues will deal with them and,
in the case of samba, I really don't use it, but it gets pulled in by
filesystems/gvfs.
-- 
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683