Brian LaMere wrote:
2010/8/31 Noriko Hosoi <nhosoi(a)redhat.com
<mailto:nhosoi@redhat.com>>
Any special messages in the errors log?
None; once the import succeeded (previous post about superior
attributes), it succeeded without any errors.
Server version.
Very fresh install. Installed at 389-ds-base-1.2.6-0.1.a1, which is
apparently still the most updated version.
That was an early alpha version that was
only in testing and should not
have been pushed to stable (not sure how that happened). I strongly
encourage you to use 389-ds-base-1.2.6-1. This is now in the testing
repos and will be pushed to stable at the end of this week.
Is MMR 2-way?
yes - though, I had disabled MMR during the import (completely; I went
in to the replication tab and unchecked the "enable replica" box,
which means I had to redo the agreements too).
Could it be possible to share the custom schema with us?
I could, yes - I'd rather not do it completely to the whole email
list, but it's not really all that sensitive of information so I could
send it to particular people. I don't recall if fedora's bugzilla
install allows for making private file uploads? Is it worth opening a
bug report since it only did it during the first load?
Yes, bugzilla does allow you
to mark attachments as private. But is it
possible to reproduce this issue with just some dummy data to avoid the
risk entirely? And if it is indeed a bug, we should open a bugzilla for
this issue.
I assume you could search x121Address and internationalISDNNumber
attributes with the base DN "cn=schema" (i.e., they are visible on
the Console) and restarting the server does not change it. If
that's the case, I think the server is in the right state now.
But we'd like to reproduce the problem you encountered.
Yes, simply removing the entries from 99user.ldif, then reloading
again, made it not repeat. However, the first server which didn't do
this did instead do something else I noticed later; I'll bring that up
in a different post, since unlike this problem (which is almost just a
bug report) the other I noticed later is an actual issue that needs to
be resolved.
One thing I realized is that the two servers aren't actually
identical; the one that grabbed those two attributes and put them in
99user.ldif is an i686 box (running in a cloud, but that shouldn't
matter...the architecture might, though). The one that didn't exhibit
that behavior was instead an x86_64 box (physical, non-vm).
Brian LaMere
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
389 users mailing list
389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users