On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:45:36 +0100 Matthew Seaman articulated: > On 29/04/2013 12:13, Jerry wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 22:25:23 -0700 > > Xin Li articulated: > > > >> This is weird. We do have some similar construct for the server > >> package -- if the package is being removed, the daemon would be > >> stopped. > >> > >> I haven't seen similar issue in the past, what's the BDB version > >> used with OpenLDAP? > > > > It is using "db46" although I have both "db48" and "db5" on my > > system. I would like to switch everything over to using "db5"; > > however, I am not sure how to accomplish that with openldap. I did > > see a patch for Debian a while back though. > > > > In any case, this is the first time this has happened in over 12 > > years of using and updating "openldap". It may have just been a > > fluke. > > To rebuild openldap based on db5, add > > WITH_BDB_VER?= 5 > > to /etc/make.conf and then rebuild the openldap client and server > ports. > > However, beware that you will need to dump out your database using > slapcat before installing the newly compiled ldap packages, and then > reload using slapadd afterwards.
Thanks Matthew, I was wondering if I would have to rebuild the database. I kind of thought that I would. One question though, why "WITH_BDB_VER?=5" instead of the same setting sans the "?" question mark? Plus, is there really a need for a space or tab between the directive and the setting? I have seen several such flags using one style or the other. Is it just a matter of style or does it actually make any difference? -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature