Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:23:02 +0200 From: Jean-Baptiste Quenot <jb.quenot@caraldi.com> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> Cc: marcus@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Patch port nss_ldap's Makefile for ldap.conf location Message-ID: <20030718162302.GC52880@watt.intra.caraldi.com> In-Reply-To: <20030718161835.GB68334@madman.celabo.org> References: <20030710110751.GA6966@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030715204952.GE86657@madman.celabo.org> <20030718161418.GA52880@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030718161835.GB68334@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* 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/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030718162302.GC52880>