[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: ldapmodify "daemon"

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
> Sounds a bit like slurpd(8)... :-)

Only because you don't know how we'll use it:  We'll have several
LDAP servers, all masters.  A daemon will receive updates and run
my "ldapmodify daemon" against all the LDAP servers.  Now that's

We can't use slurpd because the update must return success (or
failure) only when all the servers have been updated, and slurpd
doesn't return status to the client which did the update.

> This goes a bit beyond the intent of ldapmodify(1)...  I think I
> rather keep the tools "simple" wrappers for the API routines (which
> are simple wrappers around protocol operations).