On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 14:44 -0500, Charles Tryon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Michael Wood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi > > > > On 20 January 2012 09:16, Matthieu Patou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Perhaps upgradeprovision should just print a warning at the end to > > >> check that the path to dlz_bind.so is correct. > > > > > > Please refrain from using upgradeprovision until it's 100% fixed. > > > > Sorry, I should have mentioned that you told me recently that there > > was a problem with it. > > > > > AH! I missed that note. =8-0 I've been using it on a regular basis, > though not in the past few days. I'll keep my eyes open.
In general, you should not need to upgradeprovision unless we make (major) changes to our default provision template. We need to find the right way to describe the great things that upgradeprovision does, and how it relates to dbcheck (also required at times) and when to run both. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/ Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
