Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 9 Apr 1998 05:52:59 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith)
Cc:        tlambert@primenet.com, tom@sdf.com, louie@TransSys.COM, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, robert@cyrus.watson.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Netscape: Linux a top priority (news.com article)
Message-ID:  <199804090552.WAA10707@usr04.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <199804090518.WAA00322@antipodes.cdrom.com> from "Mike Smith" at Apr 8, 98 10:18:21 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > *quite* the same as the NetScape, which runs a full v3 LDAP.  The
> > UMICH LDAP + Critical Angle patches + Terry patches is nearly a
> > full v3 LDAP.  But there is little subschema support, and the
> > NULL basedn support/namingcontexts attributes are not happy.
> 
> Sure.  But is it "good enough" for the things we originally want(ed) to 
> do with it?

Well, that would be "Yes".


> > Oh yeah.  I have part of a getpwent/gethostent/getprotoent/...
> > set of libc function replacements  done (the Linux ones suck, and
> > they don't compile anyway, and they're LGPL'ed) so that you can
> > boot a FreeBSD box using an RFC2307 LDAP server instead almost
> > all of the files normally found in /etc/passwd (the ones that
> > NIS+ can serve, anyway).
> 
> getfsent/getmntent/getenv... ?

I didn't do the fstab stuff, since it was dropped from the RFC2307
code.  It's pretty trivial, actually, if you want it, but the schema
for it is draft, not RFC'ed.

In general, I made some code that took N schema entries and mapped
them to N C structures.  That's why I said it was better than the
Linux code.  8-).


> > 8-) 8-).
> 
> 8P  How about the "millions of files" backend? 

I haven't doen the backend.  I've done some investigation, though, and
have a .mk file that kicks out .so's as a first run at kicking out a
schema subtree responsibility vs. .so mechanism.  The backend isn't
completed, though.

I think moving BSD to one database is a better bet, for the long haul,
but I could revisit the code, as necessary?


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804090552.WAA10707>