> > Uhm.. What's a gal to do then??? AFAIK, there isn't yet a perfect answer, mostly because automount schema is not standard yet (though rfc2307bis is/was a proposed standard). If you are only supporting Linux clients, you probably don't need additional autofs schema. Linux autofs (at least in RedHat/Fedora) will look for objects with objectclass 'nisObject' when looking up automount info. This method dates back to the original RFC2307 (non-bis version), and might make your life easier as long as you don't expect to add Solaris clients to your environment. If you are supporting Solaris clients, you WILL need the 2307bis style automount schema, although Sun's version is NOT identical to the one at http://people.redhat.com/nalin/schema/autofs.schema. You can find the Solaris automount schema embedded in their 'idsconfig' script: http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/cmd/ldap/ns_ldap/idsconfig.sh Some more discussions about storing automount info in a directory can be found at http://www.ldapguru.org, e.g.: http://www.ldapguru.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&topic_id=2029&forum=6 Hopefully this will be a lot more straightforward in a few years, but for now the standard is a work-in-progress. -- George Susan wrote: > --- Pete Rowley <prowley at redhat.com> wrote: > > >> Susan wrote: >> >>> However, I now get this: >>> [root at cnyldap01 schema]# /opt/fedora-ds/slapd-cnyldap01/restart-slapd >>> [06/Feb/2006:13:34:09 -0500] dse - The entry cn=schema in file >>> /opt/fedora-ds/slapd-cnyldap01/config/schema/80autofs.ldif is invalid, error code 20 (Type or >>> value exists) - object class automount: The OID "1.3.6.1.1.1.1.9" is also used by the attribute >>> type "shadowInactive" >>> >>> Have you seen this error before? >>> >>> >>> >>> >> It is conflicting with the RFC2307 schema. I don't know how this stuff >> perpetuates (and this nonsense is everywhere, I have seen at least two >> phony OIDs for this attribute alone) - but the automount attribute in >> the linked schema has an OID stolen from RFC2307 and assigned by IANA to >> shadowInactive. >> > > Got it. The problem is that the schema above is provided by what looks like a Redhat employee > which lends some credence to it. > > > >> RFC2307bis is the first document to mention automount, and it designates >> automount schema thus: >> > > so, should I just use the RFC2307bis schema then? I mean, looks like this RFC has expired and > there doesn't seem to be a replacement for the autofs attributes and object classes. > > Uhm.. What's a gal to do then??? > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > -- > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > >
