389-users September 2006

389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org

42 participants
58 discussions

[Fedora-directory-users] Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH question
by Philip Kime 05 Sep '06

05 Sep '06

> What version of fedora ds is this? fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.RHEL4 installed from fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.RHEL4.x86_64.opt.rpm Downloaded from http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Download

2 1

[Fedora-directory-users] Re: How to monitor replication?
by Philip Kime 02 Sep '06

02 Sep '06

> It's possible that can happen as well. When this happens, usually changes are > propagated to the consumer through the master anyway, since that master is receiving > updates from the other master(s). I wonder if it is because we had a network blip between sites and there was an update/lock at the time so when the network came back up and the master tried to send updates, there was already a stale lock? It's actually multi-master replication - there are two masters and it's one of the masters which did this. > Did the replication monitor documentation help at all? The documentation on the repl-monitor script wasn't detailed enough perhaps? I tried getting this to work but couldn't. I tried every setting in the config file I could to no avail. It seems to be hard-coded to port 389 and I am running SSL (well, TLS). In any case, I really need something like SNMP alerts when there are replication problems. I suppose I can look for the string "NSMMReplicationPlugin" in the error log ... PK

1 0

[Fedora-directory-users] Re: How to monitor replication?
by Philip Kime 02 Sep '06

02 Sep '06

> This is normal. This can happen when two masters attempt to update the same consumer > at the same time. One of them gets through, the other has to wait. Problem is, it was like this for two days and there is only one master updating it ... I didn't notice because I can't work out how to monitor replication. I restarted the replication target ns-slapd and it was fine thereafter. PK

2 1

[Fedora-directory-users] Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH question
by Philip Kime 02 Sep '06

02 Sep '06

> Perhaps. Do an ls -l /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so then do md5sum /opt/fedora-> > ds/lib/libjss3.so [root@hqldap01 ~]# ls -l /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 182804 Jul 27 14:45 /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so [root@hqldap01 ~]# md5sum /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so 4e59a1243c27732dca9c367a9049e86a /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so

2 1

[Fedora-directory-users] How to monitor replication?
by Philip Kime 01 Sep '06

01 Sep '06

Is there a good way to monitor whether there replication problems? The SNMP tables for this don't seem to populate with anything and the last time I had a replication problem "Can't acquire busy replica. Code 1" There wasn't anything in the error logs. PK -- Philip Kime NOPS Systems Architect 310 401 0407

2 1

[Fedora-directory-users] Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH question
by Philip Kime 01 Sep '06

01 Sep '06

Seems broken ... [root@hqldap01 scripts]# ls -l /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib/libnss3.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 679918 Aug 25 13:36 /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib/libns33.so [root@hqldap01 scripts]# LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib ldd /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) libnss3.so => /usr/lib/libnss3.so (0xf7f48000) libsmime3.so => /usr/lib/libsmime3.so (0xf7f28000) libssl3.so => /usr/lib/libssl3.so (0xf7f08000) libplc4.so => /usr/lib/libplc4.so (0xf7f04000) libplds4.so => /usr/lib/libplds4.so (0xf7f01000) libnspr4.so => /usr/lib/libnspr4.so (0xf7ed0000) libjvm.so => not found libjava.so => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0xf7da5000) libsoftokn3.so => /usr/lib/libsoftokn3.so (0xf7d3f000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0xf7d2d000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xf7d28000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x56555000) Nothing to do with the NSS/NSPR library update to fix the memory leaking? Perhaps jss3 was compiled with the "ignore LD_LIBRARY_PATH" flag? Hmm. I checked ns-slapd with ldd and this seems to have been compiled with relative paths to the libs so it's ok. PK

2 1

[Fedora-directory-users] Howto on Basic Setup
by James Richardson 01 Sep '06

01 Sep '06

Hi All, There seems to be a lot of install/design documentation regarding FDS, however I've not been able to find a quick "howto" on setting a FDS up for a small company. For example, say a shop with 25-50 linux machines and 150 or so user accounts. For example, what all attributes should I be applying to my user objects? Is it necessary to subclass the schema or is there something already that fits my needs out there? Ninty-Five percent of the job of this FDS will be authentication user accounts to linux machines (other 5% could be authenticating web access or something like that). Thanks, James T. Richardson, Jr. jrichardson(a)x-iss.com eXcellence in IS Solutions, Inc. Office: 713-862-9200 x226 NOTICE: This message may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments without using, copying or disclosing the contents.

7 9

[Fedora-directory-users] LD_LIBRARY_PATH question
by Philip Kime 01 Sep '06

01 Sep '06

I've just build an LDAP dev server, the same as my prod servers. However, I can't start the console via HTTPS under X (no problems under windows). I have the same libraries etc. on my dev box (copied from PROD, where it works, in fact). I get the "libnss3.s0 not found". This library is certainly in /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib, where LD_LIBRARY_PATH points to in startconsole. I found out why it works on PROD but not on DEV - this is because /usr/lib/libnss3.s0 exists on PROD but not on DEV. HOWEVER - why is it looking in /usr/lib when LD_LIBRARY_PATH is set to look in /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib? Here is the output on PROD, where it works: [root@hqldap01 ~]# echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib [root@hqldap01 ~]# ldd /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) libnss3.so => /usr/lib/libnss3.so (0xf7f48000) libsmime3.so => /usr/lib/libsmime3.so (0xf7f28000) libssl3.so => /usr/lib/libssl3.so (0xf7f08000) libplc4.so => /usr/lib/libplc4.so (0xf7f04000) libplds4.so => /usr/lib/libplds4.so (0xf7f01000) libnspr4.so => /usr/lib/libnspr4.so (0xf7ed0000) libjvm.so => not found libjava.so => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0xf7da5000) libsoftokn3.so => /usr/lib/libsoftokn3.so (0xf7d3f000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0xf7d2d000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xf7d28000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x56555000) This upsets me as I assumed that it was using the nice new libnss3 etc. libs from the fedora tree. LD_LIBRARY_PATH seems to be doing nothing at all. I can't see any SUID/SGID things in there which would disable LD_LIBRARY_PATH? On DEV, it doesn't work because: [root@ldapdev001 ~]# echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH /opt/fedora-ds/shared/lib [root@ldapdev001 ~]# ldd /opt/fedora-ds/lib/libjss3.so linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) libnss3.so => not found libsmime3.so => not found libssl3.so => not found libplc4.so => not found libplds4.so => not found libnspr4.so => not found libjvm.so => not found libjava.so => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0xf7e4a000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x56555000) Now I'm worried that by PROD servers are using older libraries by finding them in /usr/lib ... PK -- Philip Kime NOPS Systems Architect 310 401 0407

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

389-users September 2006