updating samba4alpha15 to beta1
abartlet at samba.org
Fri Jun 15 17:15:05 MDT 2012
On Sat, 2012-06-16 at 09:01 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-16 at 00:42 +0200, Christian Huldt wrote:
> > 7 jun 2012 kl. 04.33 skrev Andrew Bartlett:
> > > On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 21:02 +0200, Christian Huldt wrote:
> > >> I have 2 left-alone samba4alpha15 servers as pdc and bdc that I plan to
> > >> update to beta1
> > >> (and then hopefully keep uptodate...)
> > >>
> > >> Is that old enough to use upgradeprovision?
> > >
> > > I think it should be OK without it. Do run 'dbcheck --cross-ncs'.
> > >
> > This gives a lot of:
> > ERROR: missing GUID component for objectCategory in object CN=CA006,CN=Computers,DC=arkitekt,DC=msg83 - CN=Computer,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=arkitekt,DC=msg83
> > Not fixing missing GUID
> > adding --fix gives:
> > ERROR: missing GUID component for defaultObjectCategory in object CN=Residential-Person,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=arkitekt,DC=msg83 - CN=Residential-Person,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=arkitekt,DC=msg83
> > Change DN to <GUID=98716508-375d-4255-9b1c-76a731ab5e0f>;CN=Residential-Person,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=arkitekt,DC=msg83? [y/N/all/none] y
> > schema_data_add: updates are not allowed: reject request
> > What would be the best way to proceed?
> Please apply this patch. We need to allow dbcheck to modify the schema,
> even if we normally deny updates (due to unfinished schema handling).
My apologies (I keep doing this, sending mails and then realising I'm
quite wrong...). I'll try and reproduce this locally, the code should
already be allowing what that patch would have done if it were
syntactically correct, so there is something else going on.
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
More information about the samba-technical