From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 18 09:23:04 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78A1737B401; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 09:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.caraldi.com (caraldi.com [62.212.102.95]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843F243F85; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 09:23:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jbq@caraldi.com) Received: from watt.intra.caraldi.com (watt.intra.caraldi.com [192.168.100.101]) by mail.caraldi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59C22147; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:23:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by watt.intra.caraldi.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 66C8EF; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:23:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:23:02 +0200 From: Jean-Baptiste Quenot To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" Message-ID: <20030718162302.GC52880@watt.intra.caraldi.com> References: <20030710110751.GA6966@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030715204952.GE86657@madman.celabo.org> <20030718161418.GA52880@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030718161835.GB68334@madman.celabo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030718161835.GB68334@madman.celabo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: ports@freebsd.org cc: marcus@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Patch port nss_ldap's Makefile for ldap.conf location X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:23:04 -0000 * Jacques A. Vidrine: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:14:18PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote: > > > * Jacques A. Vidrine: > > > > The comment in the head of ldap.conf states that this file is > > shared between nss_ldap and pam_ldap. I don't consider the extra > > nss_ldap.conf as a benefit, but as an extra work for the ports > > maintainer and the user. > > I buy that argument: PADL.com's nss_ldap and pam_ldap should probably > reference the same configuration file, which should be separate from > OpenLDAP's configuration file. > > If I can talk the pam_ldap port maintainer (Hi, Marcus!) into renaming > the pam_ldap configuration file to, say, `${PREFIX}/etc/padl.conf', > then I'll do likewise for nss_ldap. FWIW It's the first time I notice that the word *PADL* is very similar to *LDAP*. Your proposition makes sense to me, it's true that ldap.conf and openldap/ldap.conf were confusing. Cheers, -- Jean-Baptiste Quenot http://caraldi.com/jbq/