tags 475626 + wontfix thanks On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 18:09 +1000, Alex Samad wrote: > On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 03:56:12PM +0200, Arthur de Jong wrote: > > Starting nslcd before slapd can be done but is generally not a good > > idea because it will slow down the boot process due to problems > > connecting to the LDAP server. If nslcd knows that the LDAP server > > is down this could also cause problems for subsequent lookups in a > > certain time period until nslcd is aware that the LDAP server is > > available again. > > > > This means that sequence 19 may cause problems and 20 currently > > causes problems for exim. > > yep, I have moved slapd done to 18, 19 for nslcd.
I have requested [1] the slapd maintainers to run slapd at an earlier sequence but changing the sequence will only work for new installations and is considered as effort that will be fixed by dependency based booting anyway. So I'm flagging this bug as wontfix for now. So this leaves this up to local administrators to configure (either lower slapd and nslcd or increase exim and others). Anyway, some changes have been made to do better dependency-based booting [2]. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/478674 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/478807 -- -- arthur - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://people.debian.org/~adejong --
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
