On 04/21/2011 08:53 AM, Aaron Hagopian wrote:
Have you determined how to handle the EPEL issue for
RHEL 6? Are you going to rename the 389-ds rpms in EPEL? Setup a
new repository?
Still don't know. Problem with renaming 389-ds rpms is that it may
break packages that depend on 389 like freeipa and dogtag. Open to
suggestions.
Thanks,
Aaron
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:26 AM, Steven Jones wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are these bog std 389 in rhel 6 though? the reason I
ask is there is also the free-ipa packages which seems to
use parts of 389.....so Im wondering if there is any
compile/build differences for the 389 stuff in RHEL6 to
suit free ipa....which may mean the official rhel packages
are best avoided if doing FDS.
The 389-ds-base 1.2.8.x in RHEL 6.1 is almost identical to
1.2.8.x in
Fedora/epel5 except
* the one in RHEL only has critical bug fixes from now on -
the one in
Fedora/epel5 may have additional non-critical bug fixes (but
no new
functionality in the 1.2.8 branch)
* the one in RHEL does not have replication/winsync in the
core package
- it is available in an additional package ds-replication
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
|
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
