Craig White wrote:
His confusion is very common...I admit that I too was confused by that
very notion when I first started mucking with LDAP. One would think that
if you use say OpenOffice to save say Test.DOC that Microsoft Word
should be able to open that file [1]. Likewise, since LDIF is the world
of LDAP, shouldn't one expect that an LDIF file exported by Kontact be
usable with openldap?
Is there some reason that there isn't a standard schema shipped with the
server that supplies what the clients in the distribution expect?
----
If I understand your term 'clients' to mean an address book client like
Kontact, I would venture to guess that Kontact like Evolution and all
other address book clients each has their own schema. If you are
decrying that all of the various address book clients all have differing
notions about schema's, then you should take that up with them.
Most, if not all LDAP implementations include an inetOrgPerson schema
that is consistent because this is part of an RFC. Each of the address
book clients that I have looked at, use attributes that go beyond the
inetOrgPerson schema and that is what is really being discussed.
Now if you are referring to something other than address book 'clients',
then you will have to be more specific.
I mean what you need if you check LDAP authentication in the system
authentication GUI or if you use it with samba as included in the
distribution. Adding optional attributes and aliases to support the
other clients in the distribution would make sense too. The question is
simply why doesn't the stuff included in the distribution come up
configured to match and working together?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
