openldap-2.4.35: "failed to start slapd"
jerry at seibercom.net
Mon Apr 29 18:27:01 UTC 2013
On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:45:36 +0100
Matthew Seaman articulated:
> On 29/04/2013 12:13, Jerry wrote:
> > On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 22:25:23 -0700
> > Xin Li articulated:
> >> This is weird. We do have some similar construct for the server
> >> package -- if the package is being removed, the daemon would be
> >> stopped.
> >> I haven't seen similar issue in the past, what's the BDB version
> >> used with OpenLDAP?
> > It is using "db46" although I have both "db48" and "db5" on my
> > system. I would like to switch everything over to using "db5";
> > however, I am not sure how to accomplish that with openldap. I did
> > see a patch for Debian a while back though.
> > In any case, this is the first time this has happened in over 12
> > years of using and updating "openldap". It may have just been a
> > fluke.
> To rebuild openldap based on db5, add
> WITH_BDB_VER?= 5
> to /etc/make.conf and then rebuild the openldap client and server
> However, beware that you will need to dump out your database using
> slapcat before installing the newly compiled ldap packages, and then
> reload using slapadd afterwards.
Thanks Matthew, I was wondering if I would have to rebuild the
database. I kind of thought that I would. One question though, why
"WITH_BDB_VER?=5" instead of the same setting sans the "?" question
mark? Plus, is there really a need for a space or tab between the
directive and the setting? I have seen several such flags using one
style or the other. Is it just a matter of style or does it actually
make any difference?
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the freebsd-ports