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

Re: Migrating openldap db backend from ibdm to bdb

Hallvard B Furuseth wrote, on 26. feb 2007 20:19:


Is there something particular which makes this more so for OpenLDAP than
other packages, or are OpenLDAP releases more buggy than other packages,
or are existing bugs more likely to be fatal, or...?

I had the impression that this was mostly a RedHat issue.  But if it's
more general, it sounds like the only likely fix would be in OpenLDAP
or the release methods or something.

I guess I was born cynical; Red Hat always (through many years) had a lousy record of supporting OpenLDAP, whilst its support of stuff like Apache and MySQL has always been impeccable. Not only these packages, but the OS as a whole has been supported and maintained (with or without back porting) in a manner that I as a SysV and Red Hat aficionado would find it difficult (but not impossible) to leave for any competitor. One asks oneself what, for example, Centos will do in the circumstances.

Lately Red Hat has adopted (bought) it's own directory services from Netscape/Sun. Looking at Red Hat's service support conditions (available for anyone on the net), I see that Red Hat (nothing like repeating the name for cognizance) wishes to charge around $17,000 per site for support of its own directory services. I don't see any motive for continued Red Hat OpenLDAP support there. Red Hat's pecuniary philosophy is fast becoming a superset of Microsoft's.

My own experience over the last three years has been, that (latterly with Buchan Milne's continually updated Red Hat specs/srpms), I can probably do a far better job of supporting directory services using OpenLDAP on Red Hat and Fedora bases than Red Hat can using its own stuff; certainly for far less money. OpenLDAP is a crucial component of all Red Hat sites I have anything to do with.


Tony Earnshaw
Email: tonni at hetnet dot nl