--On Friday, October 05, 2012 2:11 AM +0000 richm(a)stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Certainly, here's a recent example:
I guess I missed it, but exactly which OpenLDAP release(s) had the fix
for this particular problem? That is, how could Red Hat have avoided
this problem by rebasing to a later OpenLDAP?
My guess is it was fixed in 2.4.26 or 2.4.27. There have been numerous
fixes to cn=config support since 2.4.23, so it is hard to know specifically
which one fixes the above issue. ;)
> I will note that Mandriva, at least, continually updates the
> of OpenLDAP they ship, unlike most distributions, so it definitely
> isn't all. And my point is, Red Hat could do better, and I'd like to
> see them do better. I'd like to see Debian/Ubuntu do better too.
> I.e., this isn't specific to Red Hat, but the discussion here is about
> Red Hat, and what it can do. I discuss Debian and what it can do
> better with the Debian devs on their openldap dev list.
Then I'd like to hear what Jan and the other Red Hat OpenLDAP
maintainers have to say.
Ok. One thing I do with Debian is help triage issues that are reported
there with the upstream ITS system if the issues do not appear to be due to
the usage of an old version. If there is a simple way to do that with Red
Hat, I could help there as well.
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
A Division of VMware, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration