Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think FDS (RH Directory Services) will certainly be the
> answer in the long run ... at least for PNAELV source based
> distros like CentOS. We will provide it once it is
released
> by the upstream vendor in it's final form for the
enterprise.
> For now, OpenLDAP works OK ... as least for me.
As I've been saying all along, for now, stick with the
legacy, binary 7.1 releases. They are well proven and well
documented.
I think the "litmus test" for FDS is when Red Hat switches to
it features and default programs (such as the admin tools)
for its paid/SLA Red Hat Directory Server product (only
providing any non-free stuff as "legacy").
Until then, CentOS users should feel free to use the binary
7.1 release or the new 1.0 release as they feel appropriate.
I'm sure the 1.0 will have more of a direct upgrade path,
although both are network-level compatible and can directly
replicate (which is why they say 1.0 is like a "7.2"
release).
The lack of autoconf/automake and other source-level changes
in the current 1.0 state really makes rebuilding a pain from
SRPM. I'm sure their initial, main focus was getting as much
open source as possible, including replacing the few
components they couldn't have open sourced. Now that is done
with the 1.0 release, at least to a point of compatibility
and effective usability (especially the admin tools). So you
can be sure a complete source set that builds from SRPM is
next.
--
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
