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

Re: Missing/dropped indices?

To: TimurIzhbulatov@oilspace.com
Subject: Re: Missing/dropped indices?
From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:04:10 +0200
Cc: OpenLDAP-software@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <20060510091132.GA15418@oilspace.com>
References: <5B0731A8753509478386ED3D6513B2D1AE1D84@isp-per-exch01.win2k.iinet.net.au> <44619124.4070107@stroeder.com> <20060510091132.GA15418@oilspace.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060417

Timur Izhbulatov wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:07:16AM +0200, Michael Ströder wrote:
> 
>>Mark Mcdonald wrote:
>>
>>>We have recently deployed some new servers running Debian Sarge
>>>(OpenLDAP 2.2.23) while our older systems are running Debian Woody
>>>(OpenLDAP 2.1.30).
>>
>>2.2.23 is not new, it's historic. You have to expect weird problems and
>>almost no support for these ancient OpenLDAP versions.
>>
>>You should deploy 2.3.21.
> 
> Unfortunately, at this moment it is difficult to deploy 2.3.21 out of the box
> even under Debian unstable due to some problems with GnuTLS.

Licensing philosophy of Linux distributions is one point.

But the original poster should better ask himself whether he sees any
licensing problems with deploying (self-compiled) OpenSSL at his local
site instead of sticking to ancient OpenLDAP versions.

Ciao, Michael.

References:
- Missing/dropped indices?
  - From: "Mark Mcdonald" <mmcdonald@staff.iinet.net.au>
- Re: Missing/dropped indices?
  - From: Michael StrÃder <michael@stroeder.com>
- Re: Missing/dropped indices?
  - From: Timur Izhbulatov <TimurIzhbulatov@oilspace.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Missing/dropped indices?
Next by Date: Re: Missing/dropped indices?
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread