Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Quanah Gibson-Mount
--On August 19, 2010 11:03:19 AM +0200 Matthijs Mohlmann matth...@cacholong.nl wrote: On Aug 19, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Michael Rasmussen wrote: Hi, A way to fix this: apt-get install db4.7-util cd /var/lib/ldap db4.7_checkpoint -1 db4.7_recover dpkg --configure -a Thanks for the fix, but

Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Michael Rasmussen
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:19:55 -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com wrote: What version was being migrated from (i.e., what version of BDB was openldap linked against?). If it was prior to BDB 4.8, then you have to do a slapcat/slapadd of the database (I assume that's already being

Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Quanah Gibson-Mount
--On August 19, 2010 10:41:51 PM +0200 Michael Rasmussen m...@datanom.net wrote: On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:19:55 -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com wrote: What version was being migrated from (i.e., what version of BDB was openldap linked against?). If it was prior to BDB 4.8,

Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Julien Cristau
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 13:55:55 -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: I'd also note that BDB 4.8 versions prior to 4.8.30 are not reliable and should be avoided (Not sure what's in debian atm). 4.8.30 :) Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 01:55:55PM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:19:55 -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com wrote: What version was being migrated from (i.e., what version of BDB was openldap linked against?). If it was prior to BDB 4.8, then you have to do

Bug#593550: [Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#593550: A fix

2010-08-19 Thread Michael Rasmussen
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 14:41:45 -0700 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote: The only thing I'm lost on is how the submitter managed to upgrade *to* 2.4.23-2 in the first place. If it can clarify anything. From my log: [UPGRADE] slapd 2.4.21-1 - 2.4.23-1 [UPGRADE] slapd 2.4.23-1 - 2.4.23-2