Rich, list, These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for Fedora 9? Yum upgrade says it cannot find an update match. Thanks fedora-ds-base-1.2.0-3.fc9.i386 fedora-ds-admin-1.1.7-3.fc9.i386 fedora-ds-1.1.3-1.fc9.noarch fedora-ds-dsgw-1.1.2-1.fc9.i386 fedora-ds-admin-console-1.1.3-1.fc9.noarch fedora-ds-console-1.2.0-1.fc9.noarch fedora-idm-console-1.1.1-2.fc9.i386
Techie wrote:> Rich, list, > These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for Fedora 9? >Yes, these are the latest. Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 ASAP.> Yum upgrade says it cannot find an update match. > > Thanks > > fedora-ds-base-1.2.0-3.fc9.i386 > fedora-ds-admin-1.1.7-3.fc9.i386 > fedora-ds-1.1.3-1.fc9.noarch > fedora-ds-dsgw-1.1.2-1.fc9.i386 > fedora-ds-admin-console-1.1.3-1.fc9.noarch > fedora-ds-console-1.2.0-1.fc9.noarch > fedora-idm-console-1.1.1-2.fc9.i386 > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
Rich Megginson wrote:> Techie wrote: >> Rich, list, >> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >> Fedora 9? >> > Yes, these are the latest. > > Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing > any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 ASAP.1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? Thanks -- http://sigidwu.blogspot.com Save a tree. Don''t print any documents unless it''s necessary.
sigid@JINLab wrote:> Rich Megginson wrote: >> Techie wrote: >>> Rich, list, >>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>> Fedora 9? >>> >> Yes, these are the latest. >> >> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 ASAP. > > 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? > 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? > ThanksFedora 9 EOL notice: http://www.mail-archive.com/fedora-announce-list@redhat.com/msg01574.html The Fedora Lifecycle: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle It means that there will be no more Fedora 9 updates. So no more security fixes, no more package updates. Your existing system will run just fine, it just won''t get any more updates. You can try to monitor the Fedora 10 and 11 updates and pick up security fixes from there but upgrading is probably a better long-term solution. rob
sigid@JINLab wrote:> Rich Megginson wrote: > >> Techie wrote: >> >>> Rich, list, >>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>> Fedora 9? >>> >>> >> Yes, these are the latest. >> >> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 ASAP. >> > > 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? >You won''t get any updates of 389 (fedora ds) - unless you build it yourself.> 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? >We''re working on it - Real Soon Now - we just recently had the 389 packages approved for Fedora (even though it was essentially just renaming the packages from Fedora DS to 389, we still had to go through the entire new package review process . . .)> Thanks >
I have what I think is a valid question regarding this.. So say I have my FC8 box acting as one of two MMR members and the CA for all my SSL operations including replication and client access. What is the safe process to upgrade/rebuild the box to FC11 and keep replication agreements and the SSL certs valid or intact. The replication agreements are all over SSL and the certs were issued by this machine. If I take this box down to rebuild/upgrade, the certs will be invalid in my environment correct? How would one handle this? Thank you On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote:> sigid@JINLab wrote: >> >> Rich Megginson wrote: >> >>> >>> Techie wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Rich, list, >>>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>>> Fedora 9? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, these are the latest. >>> >>> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >>> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 >>> ASAP. >>> >> >> 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? >> > > You won''t get any updates of 389 (fedora ds) - unless you build it yourself. >> >> 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? >> > > We''re working on it - Real Soon Now - we just recently had the 389 packages > approved for Fedora (even though it was essentially just renaming the > packages from Fedora DS to 389, we still had to go through the entire new > package review process . . .) >> >> Thanks >> > > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > >
Techie wrote:> I have what I think is a valid question regarding this.. > > So say I have my FC8 box acting as one of two MMR members and the CA > for all my SSL operations including replication and client access. > > What is the safe process to upgrade/rebuild the box to FC11 and keep > replication agreements and the SSL certs valid or intact. The > replication agreements are all over SSL and the certs were issued by > this machine. If I take this box down to rebuild/upgrade, the certs > will be invalid in my environment correct?Why would they be invalid?> How would one handle this? > > Thank you > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote: > >> sigid@JINLab wrote: >> >>> Rich Megginson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Techie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Rich, list, >>>>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>>>> Fedora 9? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Yes, these are the latest. >>>> >>>> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >>>> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 >>>> ASAP. >>>> >>>> >>> 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? >>> >>> >> You won''t get any updates of 389 (fedora ds) - unless you build it yourself. >> >>> 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? >>> >>> >> We''re working on it - Real Soon Now - we just recently had the 389 packages >> approved for Fedora (even though it was essentially just renaming the >> packages from Fedora DS to 389, we still had to go through the entire new >> package review process . . .) >> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >> -- >> 389 users mailing list >> 389-users@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >> >> >> > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote:> Techie wrote: >> >> I have what I think is a valid question regarding this.. >> >> So say I have my FC8 box acting as one of two MMR members and the CA >> for all my SSL operations including replication and client access. >> >> What is the safe process to upgrade/rebuild the box to FC11 and keep >> replication agreements and the SSL certs valid or intact. The >> replication agreements are all over SSL and the certs were issued by >> this machine. If I take this box down to rebuild/upgrade, the certs >> will be invalid in my environment correct? > > Why would they be invalid?Well it may be just a lack of understanding on my part. My thinking was that this host issued all the SSL certs and I would be rebuilding the box, this in turn may adversely effect the SSL communications. Judging from your response I assume this is incorrect. All hosts involved in replication have the CA cert and their server certs (both issued from this box) in their certificate stores. Because of this perhaps the SSL communication will still function normally. I have an idea of what I need to do. I will do some research/testing and see how things go. Thank you>> >> How would one handle this? >> >> Thank you >> >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> sigid@JINLab wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Rich Megginson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Techie wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rich, list, >>>>>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>>>>> Fedora 9? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, these are the latest. >>>>> >>>>> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >>>>> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 >>>>> ASAP. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> You won''t get any updates of 389 (fedora ds) - unless you build it >>> yourself. >>> >>>> >>>> 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> We''re working on it - Real Soon Now - we just recently had the 389 >>> packages >>> approved for Fedora (even though it was essentially just renaming the >>> packages from Fedora DS to 389, we still had to go through the entire new >>> package review process . . .) >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> 389 users mailing list >>> 389-users@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> 389 users mailing list >> 389-users@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >> > > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > >
Techie wrote:> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Techie wrote: >> >>> I have what I think is a valid question regarding this.. >>> >>> So say I have my FC8 box acting as one of two MMR members and the CA >>> for all my SSL operations including replication and client access. >>> >>> What is the safe process to upgrade/rebuild the box to FC11 and keep >>> replication agreements and the SSL certs valid or intact. The >>> replication agreements are all over SSL and the certs were issued by >>> this machine. If I take this box down to rebuild/upgrade, the certs >>> will be invalid in my environment correct? >>> >> Why would they be invalid? >> > Well it may be just a lack of understanding on my part. > My thinking was that this host issued all the SSL certs and I would be > rebuilding the box, this in turn may adversely effect the SSL > communications. Judging from your response I assume this is incorrect. > All hosts involved in replication have the CA cert and their server > certs (both issued from this box) in their certificate stores. Because > of this perhaps the SSL communication will still function normally.Yes.> I > have an idea of what I need to do. I will do some research/testing and > see how things go. >I think everything should continue to work fine.> Thank you > > > >>> How would one handle this? >>> >>> Thank you >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> sigid@JINLab wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Rich Megginson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Techie wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Rich, list, >>>>>>> These are the packages I have installed. Are these the latest for >>>>>>> Fedora 9? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, these are the latest. >>>>>> >>>>>> Note that Fedora 9 is soon scheduled for EOL - we will not be releasing >>>>>> any more updates for Fedora 9. I suggest an upgrade to F-10 or F-11 >>>>>> ASAP. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> 1. What could happen if we don''t upgrade to fedora 10 or fedora 11? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> You won''t get any updates of 389 (fedora ds) - unless you build it >>>> yourself. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2. Is there any prediction on when the 389DS will be release? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> We''re working on it - Real Soon Now - we just recently had the 389 >>>> packages >>>> approved for Fedora (even though it was essentially just renaming the >>>> packages from Fedora DS to 389, we still had to go through the entire new >>>> package review process . . .) >>>> >>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> 389 users mailing list >>>> 389-users@redhat.com >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> 389 users mailing list >>> 389-users@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >>> >>> >> -- >> 389 users mailing list >> 389-users@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >> >> >> > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >