Bug 2241016

Summary:	[Samba] Higher version of rhgs samba is required to avoid conflict with rhel-8.9 based samba version
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage	Reporter:	Guenther Deschner <gdeschner>
Component:	samba	Assignee:	Anoop C S <anoopcs>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Aditya Ramteke <aramteke>
Severity:	urgent	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rhgs-3.5	CC:	rhs-smb, seamurph, vdas
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	ZStream
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-11-09 18:09:36 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Guenther Deschner 2023-09-27 17:37:40 UTC

Description of problem:

With RHEL-8.9 samba version samba-4.18.6-1.el8 is getting shipped which is higher than rhgs samba - samba-4.17.7-100.el8rhgs. Once rhel-8.9 is GA-ed upgrade will fail for the rhgs customers having lower version of rhgs samba.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL - samba-4.18.6-1.el8
RHGS - samba-4.17.7-100.el8rhgs


Note - RHEL-8.9 is scheduled to be GAed on 2023-Nov-07



Description of problem:


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Sean Murphy 2023-10-13 14:44:46 UTC

thanks team - added pm_ack for the 'last mile' rebase.

thx
sean

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2023-11-09 18:09:36 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (Samba bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2023:6861