Yeah, I hear what you’re saying. 47758 is due to running bleeding edge, i get it. but i had to go there cuz I was having problems with objects getting messed up with .15 in production and even .25 in test and I went to .28 which had the SASL fix on top of .26 which fixed all object problems. The object problems were the emails I sent to the list indicating objects I couldn’t delete or modify and .28 fixed those problems. This is where i feel i was a little trapped and had to come forward to the bleeding edge. there was a method to my madness and didn’t this just willy nilly and hence where i was hoping for .29 to i might have a good mix of things - even if it was on the bleeding edge. i hope this makes sense.
/mrg On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Rich Megginson <rmegg...@redhat.com> wrote: > And that problem is entirely due to running "bleeding edge" software - a new > patch/feature urgently requested to be in EL6.6 that we didn't completely > backport to epel6. If you were running the standard 389-ds-base in EL6.5 you > would not have seen this issue. The 389-ds-base in epel6 contains patches > intended for EL6.6 but which have not yet been fully tested. The only way > you could get into a real bind is if you have run into an issue due to be > fixed in EL6.6 that you urgently need and can't wait for it to be released > through the usual EL6.6 channels.
-- 389 users mailing list 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
