Fedora directory users - Mar 2008 - Fedora DS 1.0.2 and RHEL5.1 Compatibility

Hi All,

I would like to install Fedora DS 1.0.2 LDAP (64 bits) on RHEL 5.1 (64 bits)
using the binary package (fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.FC5.x86_64.opt.rpm) built
against the FC5 that can be downloaded from the Fedora DS website (
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Download).

I installed it, launched the console and ran couple of my Java LDAP tests
that use Java Native Directory Interface (JNDI), and it seems to be working
happily.

When I look at it, it seems like it is compatible.

I would like to know if I miss anything obvious that the Fedora DS
1.0.2binary package that built against FC5 will not be compatible with
RHEL
5.1?

Thanks!!

- David

is there a reason why you can''t use 1.1?  I have it installed on rhel
5.1and it works well.


On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Chun Tat David Chu <
beyonddc.storage@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to install Fedora DS 1.0.2 LDAP (64 bits) on RHEL 5.1 (64
> bits) using the binary package (fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.FC5.x86_64.opt.rpm)
> built against the FC5 that can be downloaded from the Fedora DS website (
> http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Download).
>
> I installed it, launched the console and ran couple of my Java LDAP tests
> that use Java Native Directory Interface (JNDI), and it seems to be working
> happily.
>
> When I look at it, it seems like it is compatible.
>
> I would like to know if I miss anything obvious that the Fedora DS
1.0.2binary package that built against FC5 will not be compatible with RHEL
> 5.1?
>
> Thanks!!
>
> - David
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>
>

I''m trying to use 1.1 on EL5, and I can''t get my certificates
to enter.  When I enter the server cert I get "Either this certificate is
for another server or this certificate was not requested using this server and
the selected security device "internal (software)".
 
But the fact is that it was requested using the manager....
 
 
Anyone have ideas on what could be going on?

The packaging of Fedora DS 1.1 has a pretty significant change after Fedora
DS 1.0.4 and also we haven''t run into any stability problem with Fedora
DS
1.0.2 so to minimize risk it would be better to stay at the Fedora DS 1.0.2.

Do you think I''ll run into any problem running Fedora DS 1.0.2 build
against
Fedora Core 5 on RHEL 5.1?

Thanks!

David

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 7:29 PM, solarflow99 <solarflow99@gmail.com>
wrote:
> is there a reason why you can''t use 1.1?  I have it installed on
rhel 5.1and it works well.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Chun Tat David Chu <
> beyonddc.storage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I would like to install Fedora DS 1.0.2 LDAP (64 bits) on RHEL 5.1 (64
> > bits) using the binary package (fedora-ds-1.0.2-1.FC5.x86_64.opt.rpm)
> > built against the FC5 that can be downloaded from the Fedora DS
website (
> > http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Download).
> >
> > I installed it, launched the console and ran couple of my Java LDAP
> > tests that use Java Native Directory Interface (JNDI), and it seems to
be
> > working happily.
> >
> > When I look at it, it seems like it is compatible.
> >
> > I would like to know if I miss anything obvious that the Fedora DS
1.0.2binary package that built against FC5 will not be compatible with RHEL
> > 5.1?
> >
> > Thanks!!
> >
> > - David
> >
> > --
> > Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> > Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
> >
> >
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>
>

Hello,

I''m using LDAP Admin for administering our  user database and found out
something strange, if I add user to group via group properties, the 
permisions of that group aren''t effective, but if I add group to that 
user (via user properties), those permisions are effective. Any ideas 
why? Looks like Samba and eGroupware are checking only users and not groups.

Bye, alan

I use ldapadmin too, and reported a few bugs but I didn't notice this one.
I see that once you add a user to a group, all it does is add a MemberUID
attribute to the group, so I don't think it should matter either way.  I
just tested this with samba, and it seems to work for me, however i'm just
using workgroups, not PDC ot ADS.  The only thing I can think of is the ldap
group directive in smb.conf.

ldap group suffix = ou=Groups





On 4/2/08, Alan Orlič Belšak <alan.orlic@zd-lj.si>
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm using LDAP Admin for administering our  user database and found out
> something strange, if I add user to group via group properties, the
> permisions of that group aren't effective, but if I add group to that
user
> (via user properties), those permisions are effective. Any ideas why? Looks
> like Samba and eGroupware are checking only users and not groups.
>
> Bye, alan
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>

Thanks for the answer, found out that if I add user to group via group 
properties, LDAPAdmin put it in under attribute member, and if I add 
user to group via user properties, it add user under attribute 
memberUid. Is it possible somehow to say that member is equal to 
memberUid or how to persuade LDAPAdmin to put users directly under 
memberUid attribute?

Bye, Alan

solarflow99 pravi:
> I use ldapadmin too, and reported a few bugs but I didn''t notice
this
> one.  I see that once you add a user to a group, all it does is add a 
> MemberUid attribute to the group, so I don''t think it should
matter
> either way.  I just tested this with samba, and it seems to work for 
> me, however i''m just using workgroups, not PDC ot ADS.  The only
thing
> I can think of is the ldap group directive in smb.conf. 
>  
> ldap group suffix = ou=Groups
>  
>  
>
>
>  
> On 4/2/08, *Alan Orlič Belšak* <alan.orlic@zd-lj.si 
> <mailto:alan.orlic@zd-lj.si>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     I''m using LDAP Admin for administering our  user database and
>     found out something strange, if I add user to group via group
>     properties, the permisions of that group aren''t effective, but
if
>     I add group to that user (via user properties), those permisions
>     are effective. Any ideas why? Looks like Samba and eGroupware are
>     checking only users and not groups.
>
>     Bye, alan
>
>     --
>     Fedora-directory-users mailing list
>     Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
>     <mailto:Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com>
>     https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>

I don't really understand, All that happens for me is the user name is
assigned as MemberUid for the groups properties, no matter how I do it.  The
only exception is for a primary group.

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=1987409&forum_id=305548



On 4/3/08, Alan Orlič Belšak <alan.orlic@zd-lj.si>
wrote:
>
> Thanks for the answer, found out that if I add user to group via group
> properties, LDAPAdmin put it in under attribute member, and if I add user
to
> group via user properties, it add user under attribute memberUid. Is it
> possible somehow to say that member is equal to memberUid or how to
persuade
> LDAPAdmin to put users directly under memberUid attribute?
>
> Bye, Alan
>
> solarflow99 pravi:
>
> > I use ldapadmin too, and reported a few bugs but I didn't notice
this
> > one.  I see that once you add a user to a group, all it does is add a
> > MemberUid attribute to the group, so I don't think it should
matter either
> > way.  I just tested this with samba, and it seems to work for me,
however
> > i'm just using workgroups, not PDC ot ADS.  The only thing I can
think of is
> > the ldap group directive in smb.conf.  ldap group suffix = ou=Groups
> >
> >
> >  On 4/2/08, *Alan Orlič Belšak* <alan.orlic@zd-lj.si <mailto:
> > alan.orlic@zd-lj.si>> wrote:
> >
> >    Hello,
> >
> >    I'm using LDAP Admin for administering our  user database and
> >    found out something strange, if I add user to group via group
> >    properties, the permisions of that group aren't effective, but
if
> >    I add group to that user (via user properties), those permisions
> >    are effective. Any ideas why? Looks like Samba and eGroupware are
> >    checking only users and not groups.
> >
> >    Bye, alan
> >
> >    --
> >    Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> >    Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> >    <mailto:Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com>
> >    https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --
> > Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> > Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
> >
> >
>
> --
> Fedora-directory-users mailing list
> Fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>