On 16.12.2013 17:15, Rich Megginson wrote:
On 12/16/2013 08:07 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
we have to decide what we will do with 389-ds-base package in Fedora 20.
Currently, we know about following problems:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47621 (new functionality)
Does it matter if new functionality is a problem?
I think that this is not a problem for now. I just copied it from Nathan's
mail, I'm sorry for the noise!
Fixed. However, there is a problem with slapi-nis:
Alexander is looking into it.
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47629 (we are not sure if the syncrepl
really plays some role or not)
How can we find out?
I can't find a way how to reproduce it. I have seen 3 crashes in one hour and
then nothing for a day ...
One option is to fix 1.3.2.x as quickly as possible.
Another option is to build 1.3.1.x for F20 with Epoch == 1 and release it as
quickly as possible.
The problem with downgrade to 1.3.1.x is that it requires manual change in
dse.ldif file. You have to disable 'content synchronization' (syncrepl) and
'whoami' plugins which are not in 1.3.1.x packages but were added and
enabled by 1.3.2.x packages.
In our tests, the downgraded DS server starts and works after manual
dse.ldif correction (but be careful - we didn't test replication).
Here is the main problem:
389-ds-base 126.96.36.199 is baked to Fedora 20 ISO images and there is not way
how to replace it there. It means that somebody can do F19->F20 upgrade from
ISO and *then* upgrade from repos will break his DS configuration (because
of new plugins...).
Simo thinks that this is a reason why 'downgrade package' with 1.3.1.x
inevitably needs automated script which will purge two missing plugins from
We have an upgrade/downgrade framework, it should be easy to disable/remove
Is that it? Are there any other problems found attempting to downgrade 1.3.2
to 1.3.1 in F20?
Disabling plugins should be enough, we didn't find any other problem.
Nathan, is it manageable before Christmas? One or either way? Is you think
that the downgrade is safe from data format perspective? (I mean DB format
The db format in 1.3.1 and 1.3.2 is the same, so there should be no problems
Freeipa-devel mailing list