[Bug 553857] Review Request - pam_ldap (for an nss_ldap/pam_ldap split)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=553857

--- Comment #2 from Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-12 02:40:30 EST ---
Is having separate configuration for pam_ldap and nss_ldap really a good idea?
It creates unnecessary hassle for the sysadmins and in 99% of configurations
involving both of these packages the contents of the configuration files will
be the same. I suggest adding a subpackage (either to pam_ldap or nss_ldap -
choose package which you think will be used in more cases) named for example
ldap-config which would contain just the ldap.conf and ldap.secret files. The
nss_ldap and pam_ldap packages can then require this package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]