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

Re: substring index oddity

--On Wednesday, August 24, 2005 3:22 PM -0500 John Madden <jmadden@ivytech.edu> wrote:

I'm trying to stick with the .deb's for ease of maintenance, so I'll
have to work around this another way.

If you like, I can give you a list of reasons as to why this is a poor decision. :)

But only if you ask. :P

It can only hurt a little, right?

Debian's deb's can hurt a lot. Because they don't keep up with patches, so you get stuck dealing with known problems that have often been fixed in later releases. Right now, Debian is 5 releases behind. I've discussed things with their package maintainer, and they simply don't have enough knowledge to properly maintain the OpenLDAP package to any degree of usefulness.

My reasons for not wanting to deal with custom compiles:

- If I'm compiling from source, heck, why not compile libdb from source
too?  And why not throw in the custom patches while we're at it?

I agree, why not? I do. :P But this isn't necessarily an argument for compiling from source. It is an argument against using Debian's packaged releases since they are inadequate. There are other packages of OpenLDAP that keep current.

- I've got 2.0.x installs (ldbm at that) running still now because they
can't be taken down for upgrades.  Going from 2.0 to 2.1 or 2.2 is risky,
yet updates and such (security, grave bugs) aren't maintained for 2.0.
The vendor handles that for me.  ...I trust Debian.

That sounds more like you need to come up with a new process that allows you to upgrade servers as necessary. I can't imagine not being able to upgrade my production LDAP servers any time I need to make an important fix to them...


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