Previous setup: Fedora directory server 1.2.0. ssl, replication all running. Current setup: 389 dir server, $latest. I cannot state enough how pleased I am with the upgrade. The instructions on the web page were flawless, the update was frankly, probably the simplest thing I''ve done this week on a software package system that''s the most complex and critical of what I currently manage. I half expected SOME hiccups, errors, or things out of sync, or broken replication, or SOMETHING... and so on. Instead-- it just went flawlessly. Awesome. Absolutely awesome. Keep up the good work. --Kent C. Brodie, Medical College of Wisconsin
Brodie, Kent wrote:> > Previous setup: Fedora directory server 1.2.0. ssl, replication all > running. > > Current setup: 389 dir server, $latest. > > I cannot state enough how pleased I am with the upgrade. The > instructions on the web page were flawless, the update was frankly, > probably the simplest thing I’ve done this week on a software package > system that’s the most complex and critical of what I currently > manage. I half expected SOME hiccups, errors, or things out of sync, > or broken replication, or SOMETHING… and so on. Instead-- it just went > flawlessly. > > Awesome. Absolutely awesome. > > Keep up the good work. >Thanks! By $latest did you mean 1.2.2 or 1.2.3?> > --Kent C. Brodie, Medical College of Wisconsin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
The yum update defaults to the latest, 1.2.3. -----Original Message----- From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 3:30 PM To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. Subject: Re: [389-users] *Big* thank you for developers Brodie, Kent wrote:> > Previous setup: Fedora directory server 1.2.0. ssl, replication all > running. > > Current setup: 389 dir server, $latest. > > I cannot state enough how pleased I am with the upgrade. The > instructions on the web page were flawless, the update was frankly, > probably the simplest thing I''ve done this week on a software package > system that''s the most complex and critical of what I currently > manage. I half expected SOME hiccups, errors, or things out of sync, > or broken replication, or SOMETHING... and so on. Instead-- it justwent> flawlessly. > > Awesome. Absolutely awesome. > > Keep up the good work. >Thanks! By $latest did you mean 1.2.2 or 1.2.3?> > --Kent C. Brodie, Medical College of Wisconsin > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
Brodie, Kent wrote:> The yum update defaults to the latest, 1.2.3. >hmm - it''s not supposed to - 1.2.3 is only in the testing repository, which is not enabled by default - what platform are you running?> > > -----Original Message----- > From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com > [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich > Megginson > Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 3:30 PM > To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. > Subject: Re: [389-users] *Big* thank you for developers > > Brodie, Kent wrote: > >> Previous setup: Fedora directory server 1.2.0. ssl, replication all >> running. >> >> Current setup: 389 dir server, $latest. >> >> I cannot state enough how pleased I am with the upgrade. The >> instructions on the web page were flawless, the update was frankly, >> probably the simplest thing I''ve done this week on a software package >> system that''s the most complex and critical of what I currently >> manage. I half expected SOME hiccups, errors, or things out of sync, >> or broken replication, or SOMETHING... and so on. Instead-- it just >> > went > >> flawlessly. >> >> Awesome. Absolutely awesome. >> >> Keep up the good work. >> >> > Thanks! > > By $latest did you mean 1.2.2 or 1.2.3? > >> --Kent C. Brodie, Medical College of Wisconsin >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> >> -- >> 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 >
Whoops. I did the wrong line with the enablerepo part. :-) (No matter, this was on our testing platform only). -----Original Message----- From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 3:41 PM To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. Subject: Re: [389-users] *Big* thank you for developers Brodie, Kent wrote:> The yum update defaults to the latest, 1.2.3. >hmm - it''s not supposed to - 1.2.3 is only in the testing repository, which is not enabled by default - what platform are you running?>
Brodie, Kent wrote:> Whoops. I did the wrong line with the enablerepo part. :-) > > (No matter, this was on our testing platform only). >That''s fine. In fact that''s very good news. Thanks for doing this. What platform are you running?> -----Original Message----- > From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com > [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich > Megginson > Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 3:41 PM > To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. > Subject: Re: [389-users] *Big* thank you for developers > > Brodie, Kent wrote: > >> The yum update defaults to the latest, 1.2.3. >> >> > hmm - it''s not supposed to - 1.2.3 is only in the testing repository, > which is not enabled by default - what platform are you running? > > > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
>That''s fine. In fact that''s very good news. Thanks for doing this. >What platform are you running?RHEL 5.4
Brodie, Kent wrote:>> That''s fine. In fact that''s very good news. Thanks for doing this. >> What platform are you running? >> > > RHEL 5.4 >Great. Thanks!> > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >