https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8862
--- Comment #7 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
(In reply to Quanah Gibson-Mount from comment #6)
> (In reply to dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org from comment #5)
> > For me “as large a value as possible…” sounds without “a” better.
>
> Then it would no longer be grammatically correct.
>
> "as large a value as possible" is correct.
An alternative way to phrase it would be
"as large of a value as possible", but both are correct statements.
"as large value as possible" is not a correct statement in any form in this
context.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8862
--- Comment #6 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
(In reply to dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org from comment #5)
> For me “as large a value as possible…” sounds without “a” better.
Then it would no longer be grammatically correct.
"as large a value as possible" is correct.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8862
--- Comment #5 from dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org <dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org> ---
For me “as large a value as possible…” sounds without “a” better.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8862
--- Comment #4 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
(In reply to dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org from comment #3)
> How about this sentence:
>
> > It is important to set this to as large a value as possible…
What about it? It's a correct statement.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8862
--- Comment #3 from dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org <dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org> ---
How about this sentence:
> It is important to set this to as large a value as possible…
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6949
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mhardin(a)symas.com
--- Comment #6 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
*** Issue 9492 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6097
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugs.openldap.org/s
| |how_bug.cgi?id=9647
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6097
--- Comment #4 from Ondřej Kuzník <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
So testing confirms the systems converge right now, extremely noisily (the add
or delete fails, we go into refresh, etc.) but things settle in the right way
(the parent is removed (made into glue) and the child remains. There are
situation where is fails but those are bugs (to be) filed separately.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9628
Issue ID: 9628
Summary: Incorrect handling of c_n_ops_executing counter when
using an asynchronous backend (back-asyncmeta)
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: nivanova(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9611
Issue ID: 9611
Summary: no structural objectclass in configuration table
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.5
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: jb00356987(a)techmahindra.com
Target Milestone: ---
Dears,
When I tried to start sldap 2.5.5 I get following error :
60eff599.06749e9d 0x7fb62750f740 <<< dnNormalize: <cn=manager,cn=config>
60eff599.0674bad5 0x7fb62750f740 <= str2entry(cn=module{0}) -> 0x1193828
60eff599.06752650 0x7fb62750f740 : config_add_internal:
DN="cn=module{0},cn=config" no structural objectClass in configuration table
60eff599.06753c3c 0x7fb62750f740 config error processing
cn=module{0},cn=config:
60eff599.0675a8bc 0x7fb62750f740 send_ldap_result: conn=-1 op=0 p=0
60eff599.067611e4 0x7fb62750f740 build-corp-M1 destroy: freeing system
resources.
60eff599.06767673 0x7fb62750f740 slapd stopped.
60eff599.06770970 0x7fb62750f740 connections_destroy: nothing to destroy.
I don't understand why I get it as I'm able to run slapd 2.4.59 with same
config/DB.
Can you advice ?
Thx,
J-L.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.