Re: Corrupt LDAP DB ...

[Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@stanford.edu>]

--On Friday, October 28, 2005 6:17 PM -0700 Craig White 
<craigwhite@azapple.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 19:04 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> > On Thursday 27 October 2005 18:23, C.Lee Taylor wrote:
> > > Greetings ...
> > >
> > > 	Thanks for you input ...
> > >
> > > Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> > > > Try reading the man page specific to the BDB backend: slapd-bdb
> > >
> > > 	Thanks, found it.
> > >
> > > > RedHat's support of OpenLDAP has always been bad.  They have been the
> > > > absolute worst linux distro to run LDAP on using what they ship that
> > > > I've seen.
> > >
> > > 	Well, can't have everything for free and expect it to be perfect,
> > > 	where would the fun be in that ...
> >
> > Whether you pay RedHat or not, you still get bad OpenLDAP packages.
> >
> > Other distros have better packages for free (or for pay).
> ----
> RHEL 4 comes with a patched up 2.2.13 and it has worked well enough for
> me where I've used it so far. On RHEL 3 systems, I definitely have
> manually installed the latest 2.2.x version of ldap from source. It's
> not that it's so much work, it's sometimes just not worth it for a small
> place / light duty.
>
> You are really tough on Red Hat - perhaps somewhat deserved, perhaps
> not.

If you've ever read the changelog of OpenLDAP 2.2, you'll quickly 
understand that 2.2.13 was a very unstable release (and so were several 
after it).  Anyone using the RedHat distributed version of OpenLDAP for a 
directory service is simply asking for trouble.  A very large number of 
problems coming in to the list can get traced straight back to the fact 
that the person is using RedHat's OpenLDAP version.  Is it good for client 
bits like pam_ldap? most likely.  Is it good for running a directory 
service? Definately not.  I'll note they linked OpenLDAP against BDB 4.3, 
and yet they avoided 4.3 for their RedHat DS after seeing the discussions 
about it on the OpenLDAP software list.  Is RedHat the only distro that 
doesn't do a very good job of keeping their OpenLDAP bits current? no, they 
certainly aren't.  But historically they've been the worst.  I'd be more 
than happy to see it improved.

--Quanah

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

"These censorship operations against schools and libraries are stronger
than ever in the present religio-political climate. They often focus on
fantasy and sf books, which foster that deadly enemy to bigotry and blind
faith, the imagination." -- Ursula K. Le Guin