Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 7 Jul 2006 10:06:55 +0400
From:      "Michael Bushkov" <bushman@rsu.ru>
To:        "Doug Barton" <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: nss_ldap and openldap importing
Message-ID:  <003c01c6a18b$937cbef0$3a00a8c0@carrera>
References:  <44AD2569.9070007@rsu.ru> <44ADEBCC.70607@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Concern about licensing aside, given the other question that was raised,
> perhaps you can provide a little more detail in terms of answering the
> question, "What can having this in the base do for us that having it as a
> port cannot?"

2 arguments, basically:
1. Having nss_ldap in the source gives an ability to use nss_ldap right "out 
of the box" and equals it in rights with such nsswitch sources as NIS and 
DNS. If we have NIS in the base system, I don't see any reasons not to have 
nss_ldap. Besides, i'm sure, having nss_ldap in the base will make users 
feeling more comfortable when dealing with it.
2. I guess, we'll have to rewrite nss_ldap by ourselves sooner or later 
(actually, I can do it), so current nss_ldap import can be viewed as the 
first stage of the plan. The second stage is replacing PADL's nss_ldap with 
our own implementation.

With best regards,
Michael Bushkov




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?003c01c6a18b$937cbef0$3a00a8c0>