Problems upgrading to 1.2.6

[Edward Z. Yang]

Hello all,

I can verify that the upgrade from 389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1.fc13.x86_64
to 1.2.6-1.fc13.x86_64 requires performing the instructions described
at [1] (in our case, LDAP authentication stopped working shortly after
the upgrade.)  Is there any particular reason this isn't built into the
process by default?

Cheers,
Edward

[1]
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Subtree_Rename#warning:_upgrade_f...

[Rich Megginson]

Edward Z. Yang wrote:
>  Hello all,
>
>  I can verify that the upgrade from 389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1.fc13.x86_64
>  to 1.2.6-1.fc13.x86_64 requires performing the instructions described
>  at [1] (in our case, LDAP authentication stopped working shortly after
>  the upgrade.)  Is there any particular reason this isn't built into the
>  process by default?
>     
389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1 was the very first alpha version (i.e. 
unstable, not recommended for production use) that somehow got released 
to the F13 stable repository.  We didn't think that early alpha users 
would mind upgrading, or that early alpha users would deploy it into 
production.  I apologize for any pain/confusion caused by that.
>  Cheers,
>  Edward
>
>  [1]
> http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Subtree_Rename#warning:_upgrade_f...
>  --
>  389 users mailing list
>  389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>

[Edward Z. Yang]

Excerpts from Rich Megginson's message of Thu Sep 16 14:09:09 -0400 2010:
>  389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1 was the very first alpha version (i.e. 
>  unstable, not recommended for production use) that somehow got released 
>  to the F13 stable repository.  We didn't think that early alpha users 
>  would mind upgrading, or that early alpha users would deploy it into 
>  production.  I apologize for any pain/confusion caused by that. 
Ah, no worries, I was just a little surprised because Fedora 13 seemed
to have been shipping that version by default.  I didn't even realize
I was using an alpha. :-)

Cheers,
Edward

[Edward Z. Yang]

Oh, may I also request that the wiki page be updated to note that
the restoration process will delete the .bak file you create, so if
you /actually/ want to make a backup, you should move it somewhere
else (say, ~).

Excerpts from Edward Z. Yang's message of Thu Sep 16 14:14:48 -0400 2010:
>  Excerpts from Rich Megginson's message of Thu Sep 16 14:09:09
> -0400 2010:
>  > 389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1 was the very first alpha version (i.e. 
>  > unstable, not recommended for production use) that somehow got released 
>  > to the F13 stable repository.  We didn't think that early alpha users 
>  > would mind upgrading, or that early alpha users would deploy it into 
>  > production.  I apologize for any pain/confusion caused by that.
>  
>  Ah, no worries, I was just a little surprised because Fedora 13 seemed
>  to have been shipping that version by default.  I didn't even realize
>  I was using an alpha. :-)
>  
>  Cheers,
>  Edward

[Noriko Hosoi]

  On 09/16/2010 11:29 AM, Edward Z. Yang wrote:
>  Oh, may I also request that the wiki page be updated to note that
>  the restoration process will delete the .bak file you create, so if
>  you /actually/ want to make a backup, you should move it somewhere
>  else (say, ~). 
Thanks for pointing it out.  You are right.  Updated the step 3...

    3. Go to the DB instance directories and rename entryrdn.db4 as
    follows (repeat it on all the db instances):

    # cd /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-ID/db/NetscapeRoot/
    # mv entryrdn.db4 /safe/backup/dir/entryrdn.db4.bak
    # cd /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-ID/db/usrRoot/
    # mv entryrdn.db4 /safe/backup/dir/entryrdn.db4.bak
       ...

>  Excerpts from Edward Z. Yang's message of Thu Sep 16 14:14:48
> -0400 2010:
> > Excerpts from Rich Megginson's message of Thu Sep 16 14:09:09 -0400 2010:
> >> 389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1 was the very first alpha version (i.e.
> >> unstable, not recommended for production use) that somehow got released
> >> to the F13 stable repository.  We didn't think that early alpha users
> >> would mind upgrading, or that early alpha users would deploy it into
> >> production.  I apologize for any pain/confusion caused by that.
> > Ah, no worries, I was just a little surprised because Fedora 13 seemed
> > to have been shipping that version by default.  I didn't even realize
> > I was using an alpha. :-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Edward
>  --
>  389 users mailing list
>  389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users