From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 22 21:00:33 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E751D16A4F3 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:00:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from smtp4-g19.free.fr (smtp4-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF6CA43D64 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:00:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (tataz.chchile.org [82.233.239.98]) by smtp4-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A8553150; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:00:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from obiwan.tataz.chchile.org (unknown [192.168.1.25]) by tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D389C47C; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:01:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obiwan.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 70F3B405B; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:01:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:01:05 +0200 From: Jeremie Le Hen To: Michael Bushkov Message-ID: <20060822210105.GF58048@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <44E9582C.2010400@rsu.ru> <44EAA213.6010507@delphij.net> <002901c6c5ba$628b67d0$9800a8c0@carrera> <86hd0423zk.fsf@xps.des.no> <44EB302A.7010106@rsu.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44EB302A.7010106@rsu.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADS UP]: OpenLDAP+nss_ldap+nss_modules separated patch and more (SoC) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:00:34 -0000 Hi Michael, On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:26:18PM +0400, Michael Bushkov wrote: > This issue turned to be more complex than I originally expected. I > believe that "not having 2 different entities in the system, that do the > same thing" is the good rule. So maybe, leaving libldap.so(a) in > /usr/lib is not an absolutely good decision. But renaming libldap to > some other name and leaving it there (and enforcing everything beside > the base system to use almost the same ports' libldap) is probably much > more worse. > So, after all, I'd prefer to leave libldap (and nss_ldap, which can also > conflict with PADL's nss_ldap) as is and let users use WITHOUT_LDAP and > WITHOUT_NSS_LDAP when appropriate. Besides, this avoids to break POLA IMHO. If OpenLDAP has to be imported (is it something sure now ?), I strongly expect libldap to have its real name, as other imported softwares. Regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >