[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Suggest slapd loglevel

To: Caylan Van Larson <caylan@cs.und.edu>
Subject: Re: Suggest slapd loglevel
From: Matthew J Backes <lucca@csun.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 03:56:10 -0700
Cc: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209131722360.9764-100000@penguin-38.cs.und.nodak.edu>
Organization: California State University Northridge
References: <20020913143809.4710e397.lucca@csun.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209131722360.9764-100000@penguin-38.cs.und.nodak.edu>

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:26:46 -0500 (CDT)
Caylan Van Larson <caylan@cs.und.edu> wrote:

> > > openldap-2.0.9

> > Consider upgrading to at least openldap 2.0.25.  I don't think
> > anyone here is interested in tracking down bugs that have likely
> > been fixed already.

> WHAT!!!

> Please now someone explain to me how the bleeping versions are laid
> out?  I wanted the latest 2.0 branch and settled for 2.0.9 (largest
> digit..?)  How wrong I was, why is the naming so weird on there?
> There must be some convention that I do not know of.

Think of the dot in multidot software revisions as a comma rather than
radix point.

version 2, release 0, patch 9

versus

version 2, release 0, patch 25

Matthew Backes
lucca@csun.edu

References:
- Re: Suggest slapd loglevel
  - From: Matthew J Backes <lucca@csun.edu>
- Re: Suggest slapd loglevel
  - From: Caylan Van Larson <caylan@cs.und.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: Suggest slapd loglevel
Next by Date: Re: Suggest slapd loglevel
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread