Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Bug #2439

closed

rudder-inventory-ldap package: we don't need no more to specify version for BerkeleyDB on supported Debian-like OS

Added by Nicolas PERRON over 12 years ago. Updated almost 10 years ago.

Status:
Released
Priority:
2
Assignee:
Jonathan CLARKE
Category:
Packaging
Target version:
2.4.0~alpha7
Pull Request:
Severity:
UX impact:
User visibility:
Effort required:
Priority:
Name check:
Fix check:
Regression:

Description

Until now, we specified libdb versions to install on supported OS because of incompatibility between berkeleyDB 4.3 and the version of OpenLDAP we are using.
It seems that this no more needed for Debian or Ubuntu and we should use "libdb-dev" instead of "libdb4.6-dev | libdb4.7-dev | libdb4.8-dev"

Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

  • Subject changed from We don't need no more to specify version for BerkeleyDB on supported Debian-like OS to rudder-inventory-ldap package: we don't need no more to specify version for BerkeleyDB on supported Debian-like OS
  • Status changed from New to In progress
  • Assignee changed from Nicolas PERRON to Jonathan CLARKE
Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

  • Status changed from In progress to Pending technical review
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:b6277b0cffbd98c18a06a12ca05c6e70642941d9.

Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending technical review to Discussion
  • % Done changed from 100 to 50

Actually, this is not quite that simple. Ubuntu 11.10 and 12.04 contain both libdb4.8 and libdb5.1, so when we depend on libdb, they default to installing libdb5.1.

However, OpenLDAP 2.4.23 (the version we use) doesn't support version 5.x. Current versions (ie, 2.4.30) do.

So we have two options here:
  1. Keep OpenLDAP 2.4.23 and revert to the previous dependencies
  2. Update OpenLDAP to 2.4.30

I'm in favour of the second option, because many many bugs have been fixed, and 2.4.23 is now almost two years old and it's a one line change for us. Our usage of OpenLDAP is simple, so we shouldn't hit any untested scenarios. However, this might be considered a bit close to release date for such a change, so before implemeting I'm asking a second opinion - what do you think about this?

Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Matthieu CERDA over 12 years ago

I'm always keen on testing new things, and we will have to update one day or another. It is probably the right time to do it when it fixes bugs in the process !

Plus, you are the most experienced OpenLDAP user/developer here so I trust your experience.

Actions
Copy link
 #5

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 12 years ago

I guess it would be for the best, the number of bugfix is quite impressiv
However, it will requiere extensive tests

Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 12 years ago

I agree with Matthieu, we will have to update one day or another and this is good pretext to do so.

Actions
Copy link
 #7

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

Thanks for your feedback. I'll do the update, see #2445.

Actions
Copy link
 #8

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

  • Status changed from Discussion to Pending technical review

The OpenLDAP upgrade has been done and fixed the compilation problems. This ticket can be reviewed.

Actions
Copy link
 #9

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 12 years ago

This is OK for me.

Actions
Copy link
 #10

Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 12 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending technical review to Released
Actions
Copy link
 #11

Updated by Nicolas PERRON almost 12 years ago

  • Project changed from Rudder to 34
  • Category deleted (11)
Actions
Copy link
 #12

Updated by Benoît PECCATTE almost 10 years ago

  • Project changed from 34 to Rudder
  • Category set to Packaging
Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF