Thank you, I was able to install 1.2.9 from the testing repo.
No. The problem is that 126.96.36.199 doesn't work. Try the latest 1.2.9.x from the testing repo.On 08/05/2011 12:36 PM, Aaron Hagopian wrote:Rich,
Trying to install 389-ds-base from your repo on SL 6.1 x86_64 and getting:
$ sudo yum install 389-ds-base --enablerepo=epel-testingLoaded plugins: refresh-packagekitSetting up Install ProcessResolving Dependencies--> Running transaction check---> Package 389-ds-base.x86_64 0:188.8.131.52-1.el6 will be installed--> Processing Dependency: 389-ds-base-libs = 184.108.40.206-1.el6 for package: 389-ds-base-220.127.116.11-1.el6.x86_64--> Processing Dependency: libslapd.so.0()(64bit) for package: 389-ds-base-18.104.22.168-1.el6.x86_64--> Running transaction check---> Package 389-ds-base-libs.x86_64 0:22.214.171.124-1.el6 will be installed--> Processing Conflict: 389-ds-base-126.96.36.199-1.el6.x86_64 conflicts selinux-policy-base < 3.9.7-11--> Finished Dependency ResolutionError: 389-ds-base conflicts with selinux-policy-targetedYou could try using --skip-broken to work around the problemYou could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
Installed PackagesName : selinux-policy-targetedArch : noarchVersion : 3.7.19Release : 93.el6_1.2Size : 2.8 MRepo : installedFrom repo : sl-securitySummary : SELinux targeted base policyLicense : GPLv2+Description : SELinux Reference policy targeted base module.
My selinux policy too new?
-- 389 users mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Rich Megginson <email@example.com> wrote:
On 08/01/2011 09:41 PM, Penedo wrote:Yes. The separate ds-replication package is only for RHEL and RHDS
> On 2 August 2011 12:42, Rich Megginson<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 08/01/2011 07:54 PM, Penedo wrote:
>>> Does the requirement for a payment for the replication feature mean
>>> that I should start looking elsewhere for my LDAP needs, if I want to
>>> stick to FOSS CentOS and robust LDAP solutions? Or will the people in
>>> this forum keep maintaining a fully-functional open-source version?
>> We will keep maintaining a fully-functional open-source version. We will
>> continue to provide binaries for Fedora/EPEL.
> Would this include multi-master, as it is now or another implementation?
> Thanks again,
389 users mailing list