[389-users] Proper upgrading procedure and the use of setup-ds-admin.pl -u

[Rich Megginson]

Anthony Joseph Messina wrote:
> I am currently running the following:
> 389-admin-1.1.8-3.fc11.x86_64
>   
the new version is 389-admin-1.1.8-4
> 389-admin-console-1.1.4-1.fc11.noarch
> 389-admin-console-doc-1.1.4-1.fc11.noarch
> 389-adminutil-1.1.8-3.fc11.x86_64
> 389-console-1.1.3-3.fc11.noarch
> 389-ds-1.1.3-4.fc11.noarch
> 389-ds-base-1.2.1-1.fc11.x86_64
>   
the new version is 389-ds-base-1.2.2-1
> 389-ds-base-debuginfo-1.2.1-1.fc11.x86_64
> 389-ds-console-1.2.0-4.fc11.noarch
> 389-ds-console-doc-1.2.0-4.fc11.noarch
> 389-dsgw-1.1.4-1.fc11.x86_64
>
> Those are the packages that were the initial group that supported the renaming 
> of Fedora DS to 389 DS.  I plan to upgrade with "yum upgrade" today as some 
> bugs have been fixed.
>   
Ok.  Do not upgrade until the new versions specified above are available 
from your repo.
> What is the proper upgrading procedure for 389 DS?
>
> Can I simply do a "yum update" and expect everything to work or do I always 
> need to merge rpmnew files and run setup-ds-admin.pl after each "yum update"?
>   
You should do a yum upgrade instead of update so that obsoletes will be 
processed correctly.

Then do setup-ds-admin.pl -u

I don't think there is any merging that needs to be done, but it 
wouldn't hurt just to check the diff between file and file.rpmnew to see 
if anything has changed (that you didn't set in your configuration).
> I ask for two reasons:
>
> 1) I was hit by https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518418 and have 
> since recreated my servers with the above packages
>   

> 2) I noticed that while using SSL, the setup-ds-admin.pl requires me to delete 
> the CA cert that was previously installed and re-import it (crazy).
>   
Yes, this is a bug.   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501846
> I'd like to make sure don't have these servers crap out again.
>   
Due to the rename issue, your servers will be stopped and restarted, but 
you should not lose your run level configuration.  In what other way(s) 
did they "crap out"?
> Thanks a lot.
>
> -A
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-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: 3258 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-directory-users/attachments/20090828/4bdccf3e/attachment.bin>