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

Re: Goofy RedHat Problem

--On Tuesday, July 06, 2004 12:42 PM -0300 Andreas <andreas@conectiva.com.br> wrote:

On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 11:29:29AM -0400, John Klein wrote:
Permit me to gesture vaguely in the direction of Gentoo, which is using
2.1.26 somehow, despite dependencies. (And will shortly be using 2.1.30,
according to ~x86 - in fact, it already is in some architectures.)

2.1.26 -> 2.1.30 is a piece of cake.

To put it more clearly: it's entirely understandable for distros to be a
few versions behind for the reasons you cite. It's inexcusable for them
to  be /two and a half years/ behind[0], especially /because/ so much
other software depends on things like OpenLDAP to function properly.
Stability is not a strict linear progression with age - it's more like a
parabolic curve.

Agreed. But there is nothing they will be able to do unless they upgrade (almost) the whole distro. And that's when new versions of a distro come out. Some more frequently than others, of course.

I think there is an issue being missed here, that could use some addressing.

Just because a distro *comes* with a particular release does not mean you *have* to use that release. Yes, there are pieces in the distro that may have been built to use the system installed OpenLDAP, which can be problematic.

However, when it comes to running a directory service, there is no need to rely on or use the distro release.

For example, I have 2 debian stable systems. One is running as a 2.2 master, and the other as a 2.2 replica. That is accomplished simply by building and installing OpenLDAP 2.2 into /usr/local. I make no use of the distro installed OpenLDAP, and I don't have to worry about conflicts, since the two installations of OpenLDAP on the box are in separate locations.


Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Developer
ITSS/Shared Services
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html