Fedora directory users - Jun 2005 - How about support on Windows ?

Hi All,

    I know that as of now, it is supported on Linux and Solaris, but
I''m
wondering what it takes to 
deploy it on Windows NT(2000, xp, 2003, ETC).

    Since redhat supports cygwin AND originally NDS worked on Windows, it
should NOT be too
difficult. What would be more useful would be a native port of NDS on
Windows (minGNU comes to mind) 
what with APR(http://apr.apache.org/) available.

	Are there any efforts to 
a) come out with a binary for windows
b) help anyone who''s already working on a windows port.
c) atleast provide a source level build.

LDAP is seriously needed (and missing) on enterprise infrastructures and
support for Windows(as 
Firefox showed) will take a product much further than without windows.

Thank you,

BR,
~A

Bacchu, Anjan wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>    I know that as of now, it is supported on Linux and Solaris, but
I''m
>wondering what it takes to 
>deploy it on Windows NT(2000, xp, 2003, ETC).
>
>    Since redhat supports cygwin AND originally NDS worked on Windows, it
>should NOT be too
>difficult. What would be more useful would be a native port of NDS on
>Windows (minGNU comes to mind) 
>what with APR(http://apr.apache.org/) available.
>  
>
How would APR help?  We already use NSPR as our OS abstraction layer 
(which is what Firefox et. al. uses).
>	Are there any efforts to 
>a) come out with a binary for windows
>  
>
We haven''t planned to do one.  We would probably consider it if there
is
enough demand.
>b) help anyone who''s already working on a windows port.
>  
>
The server has already been ported to Windows.  What this entails is the 
native Windows environment (not cygwin or mingw) with gmake.exe, MKS 
shell tools (sh, sed, grep, awk, etc.) and the native Windows compilers 
(cl.exe, link.exe, etc.).  The Windows compilers are available for free 
for the command line versions only from Microsoft AFAIK - but no 
debugger or MSVC++.

It would be great to be able to use cygwin and/or mingw.  We would 
certainly appreciate help with this.
>c) atleast provide a source level build.
>
>LDAP is seriously needed (and missing) on enterprise infrastructures and
>support for Windows(as 
>Firefox showed) will take a product much further than without windows.
>  
>
Really?  Up until DS 7.0, we supported the DS on Windows for several 
years.  We found that most people with Windows deployments either used 
Active Directory (since they already paid for it), or they were using 
Samba on unix/linux.  Almost everyone who was downloading and using the 
DS on Windows were just doing it for demonstration and/or evaluation 
purposes (including the press), because they just wanted to run it on 
their x86 desktop or laptop, and in those days that necessarily meant 
Windows.  But with the growth of Linux, I can happily run DS 7.1on my 
RHEL3 desktop or my RHEL4 laptop.  Most people planning serious 
deployments eventually used Unix for the production LDAP server, and now 
many are using Linux.
>Thank you,
>
>BR,
>~A
>
>--
>Fedora-directory-users mailing list
>Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>  
>

At 5:09 PM -0600 6/3/05, Rich Megginson wrote:
>Bacchu, Anjan wrote:
>>LDAP is seriously needed (and missing) on enterprise infrastructures and
>>support for Windows(as Firefox showed) will take a product much 
>>further than without windows.
>>
>Really?  Up until DS 7.0, we supported the DS on Windows for several 
>years.  We found that most people with Windows deployments either 
>used Active Directory (since they already paid for it), or they were 
>using Samba on unix/linux.  Almost everyone who was downloading and 
>using the DS on Windows were just doing it for demonstration and/or 
>evaluation purposes (including the press), because they just wanted 
>to run it on their x86 desktop or laptop, and in those days that 
>necessarily meant Windows.  But with the growth of Linux, I can 
>happily run DS 7.1on my RHEL3 desktop or my RHEL4 laptop.  Most 
>people planning serious deployments eventually used Unix for the 
>production LDAP server, and now many are using Linux.
Having the console available from Windows is a definite plus, and I 
certainly used the Windows version frequently for quick proofs of 
concept, or for messing with concepts when I didn''t have a UNIX test 
machine and just needed to test configuration or what have you, so 
yes a Windows build would be useful.  And given the general 
preferability of binary builds for platforms that don''t tend to come 
with development environments (makes it easy to download and run at a 
client''s site to show them something that needs to be demonstrated), 
it seems to me that a binary build for Windows would be more helpful 
than one for MacOS X or Linux, though probably not more useful than 
one for Solaris.

-jeff