From rmeggins at redhat.com Thu Mar 2 14:55:07 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:55:07 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] [SECURITY] Fedora Directory Server 1.0.1 Update Message-ID: <4407074B.4090505@redhat.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------- Fedora Directory Server Update Notification 2006-03-01 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Product : Fedora Directory Server Name : Directory Server Version : 1.0.1 Release : 1 Summary : The core LDAP server engine Description : The core directory server component of Fedora Directory Server is the LDAP server engine/daemon. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Update Information: Evgeny Legerov of GLEG, Ltd. (http://www.gleg.net/) discovered several flaws affecting Fedora Directory Server using the GLEG ProtoVer LDAP test suite. A remote attacker who is able to connect to the directory server could send malicious requests which would cause the server to crash leading to a denial of service. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project assigned the names CVE-2006-0451, CVE-2006-0452, and CVE-2006-0453 to these issues. --------------------------------------------------------------------- This update is available by upgrading to Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 available here: http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Download The above link has instructions for downloading the new version and upgrading older versions. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rmeggins at redhat.com Thu Mar 2 14:55:17 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 07:55:17 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 Message-ID: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 is released! This release contains new features, new platform support, and many bug fixes. * Extended Password Syntax checking - passwords can be checked to see if they conform to the following: ** minimum password character length (old feature, but now the default is 8 characters) ** minimum number of digit characters (0-9) ** minimum number of ASCII alpha characters (a-z, A-Z) ** minimum number of uppercase ASCII alpha characters (A-Z) ** minimum number of lowercase ASCII alpha characters (a-z) ** minimum number of special ASCII characters (!@#$, etc.) ** minimum number of 8-bit characters ** maximum number of times the same char can be immediately repeated (aaabbb) ** minimum number of character categories that are represented (categories are lower, upper, digit, special, and 8-bit) ** Screenshot - http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Image:Pwdsyntax.png * Support for Linux x86_64 - RPMs for Fedora Core 4 and Fedora Core3/RHEL4 x86_64 are on the Download page. * Preliminary support for Fedora Core 5 - including support for Apache 2.2 and native java * Bug fixes - follow this link (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183369) to see the bugzilla report Release Notes: http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Release_Notes Download: http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Download Home Page: http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Main_Page -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rmeggins at redhat.com Thu Mar 2 15:24:31 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 08:24:31 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Re: [Fedora-directory-users] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <1141312598.19624.5.camel@dhollis-lnx.sunera.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <1141312598.19624.5.camel@dhollis-lnx.sunera.com> Message-ID: <44070E2F.9070508@redhat.com> David Hollis wrote: >On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 07:55 -0700, Richard Megginson wrote: > > > >>* Support for Linux x86_64 - RPMs for Fedora Core 4 and Fedora >>Core3/RHEL4 x86_64 are >>on the Download page. >> >> > >Would the x86_64 support be of the "it builds and it might work. Use at >your own risk" variety or "it builds, it works, we've fully tested and >would be the enterprise on it" variety? > The former. This is the first time we've released on x86_64. However, we've had native 64 bit support for years on Sun and HP, so it's not as if this is the first ever native 64 bit version that has a lot of latent 64 bit porting issues. >I've been waiting to finally >upgrade from OpenLDAP until there was a native 64-bit version, and now >it's here. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >Fedora-directory-users mailing list >Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From felipe.alfaro at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 23:03:27 2006 From: felipe.alfaro at gmail.com (Felipe Alfaro Solana) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 00:03:27 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Re: [Fedora-directory-announce] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> Message-ID: <6f6293f10603021503h5da556c3tc9d906ffc6139e23@mail.gmail.com> > * Preliminary support for Fedora Core 5 - including support for Apache > 2.2 and native java What RPM should I install on FC5T3? I did install http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/download/fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.FC4.i386.opt.rpm. However, during installation, the Admin Server fails to start: httpd.worker: Syntax error on line 151 of /opt/fedora-ds/admin-serv/config/httpd.conf: Cannot load /opt/fedora-ds/bin/admin/lib/libmodrestartd.so into server: /opt/fedora-ds/bin/admin/lib/libmodrestartd.so: undefined symbol: apr_filename_of_pathname What did I do wrong? From rmeggins at redhat.com Thu Mar 2 23:46:53 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:46:53 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Re: [Fedora-directory-announce] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <6f6293f10603021503h5da556c3tc9d906ffc6139e23@mail.gmail.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <6f6293f10603021503h5da556c3tc9d906ffc6139e23@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <440783ED.3040606@redhat.com> Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: >>* Preliminary support for Fedora Core 5 - including support for Apache >>2.2 and native java >> >> > >What RPM should I install on FC5T3? > There are no RPMs (yet) for FC5. Instead, you'll have to build it from source. See http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Building#One-Step_Build >I did install >http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/download/fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.FC4.i386.opt.rpm. >However, during installation, the Admin Server fails to start: > >httpd.worker: Syntax error on line 151 of >/opt/fedora-ds/admin-serv/config/httpd.conf: Cannot load >/opt/fedora-ds/bin/admin/lib/libmodrestartd.so into server: >/opt/fedora-ds/bin/admin/lib/libmodrestartd.so: undefined symbol: >apr_filename_of_pathname > >What did I do wrong? > >-- >Fedora-directory-devel mailing list >Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From felipe.alfaro at gmail.com Fri Mar 3 00:08:17 2006 From: felipe.alfaro at gmail.com (Felipe Alfaro Solana) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 01:08:17 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Re: [Fedora-directory-announce] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <440783ED.3040606@redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <6f6293f10603021503h5da556c3tc9d906ffc6139e23@mail.gmail.com> <440783ED.3040606@redhat.com> Message-ID: <6f6293f10603021608x154ecf14v8be143b28be5efad@mail.gmail.com> > There are no RPMs (yet) for FC5. Instead, you'll have to build it from > source. See http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Building#One->Step_Build Ups! Thanks... I will give it a try. From fitzsim at redhat.com Fri Mar 3 01:23:48 2006 From: fitzsim at redhat.com (Thomas Fitzsimmons) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:23:48 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1141349028.8744.4.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> Hi, The build instructions on http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Building#One-Step_Build need to be updated. Step two should be: cd dsbuild-fds102/meta/ds I can confirm that FDS 1.0.2 builds out-of-the-box on my Rawhide workstation on a completely free stack (no proprietary JDK required for the Java bits). This is excellent news! As a smoke test I tried running startconsole on java-gcj-compat. It fails immediately with a GC out-of-memory error. This is because gij's support for the -ms and -mx options is limited. Would it be OK to remove these options from the launcher scripts for the next release? When I remove -ms8m -mx64m from startconsole the GUI tool works well on our free Swing implementation. I've attached a screenshot. Could someone add a note about this workaround to the release notes? Thanks, Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: fds-free-2006-03-02.png Type: image/png Size: 60812 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rmeggins at redhat.com Fri Mar 3 01:39:01 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 18:39:01 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <1141349028.8744.4.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <1141349028.8744.4.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> Message-ID: <44079E35.30604@redhat.com> Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: >Hi, > >The build instructions on > >http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Building#One-Step_Build > >need to be updated. Step two should be: > >cd dsbuild-fds102/meta/ds > >I can confirm that FDS 1.0.2 builds out-of-the-box on my Rawhide >workstation on a completely free stack (no proprietary JDK required for >the Java bits). This is excellent news! > > Thanks to you and Lillian for your help. >As a smoke test I tried running startconsole on java-gcj-compat. It >fails immediately with a GC out-of-memory error. This is because gij's >support for the -ms and -mx options is limited. Would it be OK to >remove these options from the launcher scripts for the next release? > > I think we still may need them using other jvms and on other platforms, so we'll have to change the script to determine the java version. >When I remove -ms8m -mx64m from startconsole the GUI tool works well on >our free Swing implementation. I've attached a screenshot. > >Could someone add a note about this workaround to the release notes? > > Done. >Thanks, >Tom > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >Fedora-directory-devel mailing list >Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From fitzsim at redhat.com Fri Mar 3 02:30:09 2006 From: fitzsim at redhat.com (Thomas Fitzsimmons) Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:30:09 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <44079E35.30604@redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <1141349028.8744.4.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> <44079E35.30604@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1141353009.8744.44.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> Hi, On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 18:39 -0700, Richard Megginson wrote: > Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: > >As a smoke test I tried running startconsole on java-gcj-compat. It > >fails immediately with a GC out-of-memory error. This is because gij's > >support for the -ms and -mx options is limited. I looked into this a little more: gij fully supports the -mx option but its -ms option is currently a no-op because it was causing a segfault in the garbage collector (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20699). The startconsole problem seems to be that the selected -mx value is too small for gij. > > Would it be OK to > >remove these options from the launcher scripts for the next release? > > > > > I think we still may need them using other jvms and on other platforms, > so we'll have to change the script to determine the java version. Increasing -mx to 70m works on my workstation. After startup top shows a resident size of 43m; I assume there is a spike in memory consumption on startup that causes the out-of-memory error but I would have to profile the console to be sure. For gij, it may be enough to increase the -mx value in the script to say, 128m. But if possible these options should be removed, or only used on platforms and JVMs that require them. Tom From felipe.alfaro at gmail.com Fri Mar 3 09:37:41 2006 From: felipe.alfaro at gmail.com (Felipe Alfaro Solana) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 10:37:41 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Announcing Fedora Directory Server 1.0.2 In-Reply-To: <1141353009.8744.44.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> References: <44070755.6040201@redhat.com> <1141349028.8744.4.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> <44079E35.30604@redhat.com> <1141353009.8744.44.camel@tortoise.toronto.redhat.com> Message-ID: <6f6293f10603030137r38e120fdve7d3afc7e7e4ca37@mail.gmail.com> > For gij, it may be enough to increase the -mx value in the script to > say, 128m. But if possible these options should be removed, or only > used on platforms and JVMs that require them. Although the console starts up and seems to work fine, when trying to open the Directory Server Console, the following exception gets fired: Exception in thread "http://machine.name:38900/" java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Thread.stop unimplemented at java.lang.Thread.stop (libgcj.so.7) at java.lang.Thread.stop (libgcj.so.7) at com.netscape.management.client.comm.HttpChannel.close (Unknown Source) at com.netscape.management.client.comm.CommManager.closeChannel (Unknown Source) at com.netscape.management.client.comm.CommManager.next (Unknown Source) at com.netscape.management.client.comm.HttpChannel.run (Unknown Source) at java.lang.Thread.run (libgcj.so.7) From peter.djalaliev at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 20:14:05 2006 From: peter.djalaliev at gmail.com (Peter Djalaliev) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:14:05 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] TLS upgrades with mod_nss Message-ID: <3032cfcd0603151214y46bd1586qb145d86b4d19f818@mail.gmail.com> Hello, Apache/mod_ssl supports TLS upgrades (RFC2817) in version 2.2.0 and I was wondering - has anybody anybody ported this to mod_nss? If not, I will try to implement TSL upgrades in mod_nss. I can find online the patch that was probably applied to mod_ssl to implement the TLS upgrades there and my plan is to start from there and try to make equivalent changes to mod_nss. Does anybody have any advice as to what I should be careful about - e.g. places where mod_nss might require something more than just changes equivalent to those done to mod_ssl? Two of the significant differences b/n mod_nss and mod_ssl that I can think of right now are the NSS database vs. the mod_ssl certificate and key files, as well as that mod_nss always authenticates the whole certificate chain. >From what I see so far the main changes that need to be made to mod_nss are in the way the module configures: itself (ssl_init_Modules), the SSL engine (nss_cmd_NSSEngine) and a server (ssl_init_ConfigureServer). Also, changed would be needed in the Access handler, Authentication handler, Read Request handler, and Fixup hook functions. An additional question is: where is the nss_cmd_NSSEngine function invoked? It's function prototype should be changed because now the NSSEngine state is not simply a boolean, but I can't find where the function is invoked from... Thanks in advance :) Regards, Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rcritten at redhat.com Wed Mar 15 20:40:09 2006 From: rcritten at redhat.com (Rob Crittenden) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:40:09 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] TLS upgrades with mod_nss In-Reply-To: <3032cfcd0603151214y46bd1586qb145d86b4d19f818@mail.gmail.com> References: <3032cfcd0603151214y46bd1586qb145d86b4d19f818@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44187BA9.7050809@redhat.com> Peter Djalaliev wrote: > Hello, > > Apache/mod_ssl supports TLS upgrades (RFC2817) in version 2.2.0 and I > was wondering - has anybody anybody ported this to mod_nss? > > If not, I will try to implement TSL upgrades in mod_nss. I can find > online the patch that was probably applied to mod_ssl to implement the > TLS upgrades there and my plan is to start from there and try to make > equivalent changes to mod_nss. > > Does anybody have any advice as to what I should be careful about - e.g. > places where mod_nss might require something more than just changes > equivalent to those done to mod_ssl? Two of the significant differences > b/n mod_nss and mod_ssl that I can think of right now are the NSS > database vs. the mod_ssl certificate and key files, as well as that > mod_nss always authenticates the whole certificate chain. > > From what I see so far the main changes that need to be made to mod_nss > are in the way the module configures: itself (ssl_init_Modules), the SSL > engine (nss_cmd_NSSEngine) and a server (ssl_init_ConfigureServer). > Also, changed would be needed in the Access handler, Authentication > handler, Read Request handler, and Fixup hook functions. > > An additional question is: where is the nss_cmd_NSSEngine function > invoked? It's function prototype should be changed because now the > NSSEngine state is not simply a boolean, but I can't find where the > function is invoked from... > Are there any browsers that support RFC 2871 yet? In any case, no I haven't added support for this though contributions are welcome :-) The naming of nss_cmd_NSSEngine came from mod_ssl. You'll see the definitions in mod_nss.c and mod_nss.h. Look for SSL_CMD_SRV(Engine, FLAG,... If I understand the RFC correctly, and from a quickie look at mod_ssl in Apache 2.2 most of the code is isolated into the Engine change you mentioned, determining whether the https scheme is used (nss_hook_http_scheme & nss_hook_default_port) some checks for OPTIONAL in ssl_engine_kernel.c and the actual renegotiation code which in mod_ssl resides in ssl_engine_io.c and in mod_nss would go into nss_engine_io. You can look at nss_engine_kernel in the function nss_hook_Access() on how to force an SSL Handshake. good luck rob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From peter.djalaliev at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 00:32:50 2006 From: peter.djalaliev at gmail.com (Peter Djalaliev) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:32:50 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Re: TLS upgrades with mod_nss Message-ID: <3032cfcd0603151632m6b9b9c1eyae0f07cadea3f89b@mail.gmail.com> No, there are not any browsers that support this, but apparently it is not very complicated to implement server-requested TLS upgrades in Firefox or any another application using NSS: http://archive.netbsd.se/?ml=mozilla-crypto&a=2005-10&t=1393140 The way I see it, Firefox would look for responses with HTTP 426 (Upgrade Required) code and then the exchange specified in RFC2817 would take place. I am not sure this will actually work :) One step at a time... :) Apparently, it has been done before, but not documented. Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From peter.djalaliev at gmail.com Tue Mar 21 16:24:52 2006 From: peter.djalaliev at gmail.com (Peter Djalaliev) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:24:52 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] TLS upgrades with mod_nss Message-ID: <3032cfcd0603210824u70f6c6d8mcc2a3a97988b7ea7@mail.gmail.com> Rob, I made most changes required to mod_nss. You recommended looking in nss_hook_Access() to see how to force a TLS handshake. In this function, the TLS handshake is renegotiated from scratch to reflect any reconfigured parameters, right? In the case of upgrading HTTP to TLS, there has been no previous TLS handshake. Should I still use the SSL_ReHandshake function (as in nss_hook_Access)? Or, would I need to call SSL_ResetHandshake instead? Regards, Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rcritten at redhat.com Tue Mar 21 19:49:11 2006 From: rcritten at redhat.com (Rob Crittenden) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:49:11 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] TLS upgrades with mod_nss In-Reply-To: <3032cfcd0603210824u70f6c6d8mcc2a3a97988b7ea7@mail.gmail.com> References: <3032cfcd0603210824u70f6c6d8mcc2a3a97988b7ea7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <442058B7.1070405@redhat.com> Peter Djalaliev wrote: > Rob, > > I made most changes required to mod_nss. You recommended looking in > nss_hook_Access() to see how to force a TLS handshake. In this > function, the TLS handshake is renegotiated from scratch to reflect any > reconfigured parameters, right? > > In the case of upgrading HTTP to TLS, there has been no previous TLS > handshake. Should I still use the SSL_ReHandshake function (as in > nss_hook_Access)? Or, would I need to call SSL_ResetHandshake instead? You know, I'm not quite sure. Let me check with the SSL team and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. rob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From joebaker at nelfc.com Fri Mar 31 17:14:50 2006 From: joebaker at nelfc.com (Joe Baker) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 11:14:50 -0600 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Installing FDS In-Reply-To: <20060316170044.8330D73AA8@hormel.redhat.com> References: <20060316170044.8330D73AA8@hormel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> Is there a good howto for installing Fedora Directory Server (FDS) on a Fedora Core 5 system. I've heard many good things about FDS. I'd like to begin migrating from our old Mandriva 9.1 system running OpenLDAP to FDS. I've been surprised that FDS hasn't shown up over on Gentoo as an ebuild script. I tried but failed to install FDS on CentOS 4. I'm looking for an easy way to try FDS but my past installation attempts have left me thinking it is a difficult thing to get right. -Joe Baker From rmeggins at redhat.com Fri Mar 31 17:23:50 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 10:23:50 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Installing FDS In-Reply-To: <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> References: <20060316170044.8330D73AA8@hormel.redhat.com> <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> Message-ID: <442D65A6.5090800@redhat.com> Joe Baker wrote: > Is there a good howto for installing Fedora Directory Server (FDS) on a > Fedora Core 5 system. > We don't (yet) have RPMs for Fedora Core 5, but you can build it using the One Step Build method easily. http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Building#One-Step_Build You won't be able to install RPMs for Fedora Core 4 on FC5 because FC5 uses Apache 2.2. > I've heard many good things about FDS. I'd like to begin migrating from > our old Mandriva 9.1 system running OpenLDAP to FDS. > > I've been surprised that FDS hasn't shown up over on Gentoo as an ebuild > script. > > I tried but failed to install FDS on CentOS 4. > What problems did you have? I think CentOS 4 is roughly the same as RHEL4 - did you try to install the FDS RHEL4/FC3 rpm? > I'm looking for an easy way to try FDS but my past installation attempts > have left me thinking it is a difficult thing to get right. > It may be something simple like hostname/DNS configuration. > -Joe Baker > > -- > Fedora-directory-devel mailing list > Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From admin at tbilgazi.ge Fri Mar 31 19:44:46 2006 From: admin at tbilgazi.ge (admin at tbilgazi.ge) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 23:44:46 +0400 (GET) Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Installing FDS In-Reply-To: <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> References: <20060316170044.8330D73AA8@hormel.redhat.com> <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> Message-ID: <2087.213.157.197.99.1143834286.squirrel@mail.tbilgazi.ge> > Is there a good howto for installing Fedora Directory Server (FDS) on a > Fedora Core 5 system. > > I've heard many good things about FDS. I'd like to begin migrating from > our old Mandriva 9.1 system running OpenLDAP to FDS. > > I've been surprised that FDS hasn't shown up over on Gentoo as an ebuild > script. > > I tried but failed to install FDS on CentOS 4. > > I'm looking for an easy way to try FDS but my past installation attempts > have left me thinking it is a difficult thing to get right. > > -Joe Baker > > -- > Fedora-directory-devel mailing list > Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel > just one question.... did you installed java? or.. can you post error messages? From rmeggins at redhat.com Fri Mar 31 19:26:02 2006 From: rmeggins at redhat.com (Richard Megginson) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:26:02 -0700 Subject: [Fedora-directory-devel] Installing FDS In-Reply-To: <2087.213.157.197.99.1143834286.squirrel@mail.tbilgazi.ge> References: <20060316170044.8330D73AA8@hormel.redhat.com> <442D638A.3000508@nelfc.com> <2087.213.157.197.99.1143834286.squirrel@mail.tbilgazi.ge> Message-ID: <442D824A.508@redhat.com> admin at tbilgazi.ge wrote: >> Is there a good howto for installing Fedora Directory Server (FDS) on a >> Fedora Core 5 system. >> >> I've heard many good things about FDS. I'd like to begin migrating from >> our old Mandriva 9.1 system running OpenLDAP to FDS. >> >> I've been surprised that FDS hasn't shown up over on Gentoo as an ebuild >> script. >> >> I tried but failed to install FDS on CentOS 4. >> >> I'm looking for an easy way to try FDS but my past installation attempts >> have left me thinking it is a difficult thing to get right. >> >> -Joe Baker >> >> -- >> Fedora-directory-devel mailing list >> Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel >> >> > > > > just one question.... did you installed java? > or.. can you post error messages? > Yes. It's hard to guess what it might be, but I assume you have first read Release Notes - http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Release_Notes Install Guide - http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Install_Guide Troubleshooting - http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/FAQ#Troubleshooting > -- > Fedora-directory-devel mailing list > Fedora-directory-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3178 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: