Hello people, i'm brasilian. I'm sorry for the erros... ok?! :-) Let's go! My company uses openldap-2.1.21. What is the version samba compatible with openldap-2.1.21?! I'm trying install samba-3.0.11, but it requires openldap-2.2.23. I don't want install the release openldap-2.2.23 for it. Thank you.
Le Mercredi 23 F?vrier 2005 15:39, Orlando de Sousa a ?crit?:> Hello people, > i'm brasilian. I'm sorry for the erros... ok?! :-) Let's go! > My company uses openldap-2.1.21. > What is the version samba compatible with openldap-2.1.21?! > I'm trying install samba-3.0.11, but it requires openldap-2.2.23. I > don't want install the release openldap-2.2.23 for it.you should juste recompile samba from source or source RPM, and it might work with any 2.x version of openldap Hope it helps Pierre -- --- Musique --- L'auteur de Jeux Interdits, Narciso Yepes, est mort. Les feux de camp en deuil ont observ? une minute de silence. +-- Br?ves Charlie Hebdo n?255 (07/05/97) --+ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20050223/f1f3a594/attachment.bin
Orlando de Sousa:> i'm brasilian.Beautiful, resonant and rhythmic language, pt_BR :)> I'm sorry for the erros... ok?! :-) Let's go! My company > uses openldap-2.1.21. What is the version samba compatible with > openldap-2.1.21?! I'm trying install samba-3.0.11, but it requires > openldap-2.2.23. I don't want install the release openldap-2.2.23 for > it.1: LDAP is the be-all and end-all. If any service whatsoever does not work with LDAP, it is worthless, for me. For me, "LDAP" is synonymous with OpenLDAP. 2: the only stable, recent version of OpenLDAP (as announced by openldap.org) is 2.2.13. OL 2.1.22 is demonstrably buggy and will ultimately fsck up your system. The latest, stable, version of 2.1 is 2.1.30 and even that is deprecated and obsolete (source: openldap.org). 3: learn OpenLDAP before you learn Samba, Postfix, Courier IMAP, pam, nss, - whatever. Learn that OpenLDAP 2.2.23 needs Sleepycat BDB 4.2.52 (2 x patched), maybe Cyrus SASL 2.1.20. Furthermore, that you need to configure DB_CONFIG to use it at all. Best, --Tonni -- mail: tonye@billy.demon.nl http://www.billy.demon.nl
William Enestvedt:>> 2: the only stable, recent version of OpenLDAP (as announced by >> openldap.org) is 2.2.13. OL 2.1.22 is demonstrably buggy and will >> ultimately fsck up your system. The latest, stable, version of 2.1 is >> 2.1.30 and even that is deprecated and obsolete (source: >> openldap.org). >> > I thought that Samba 3.0.11 required OpenLDAP 2.2.23...so what's the > most reliable, most stable combination of the two? (I'm on Solaris 8, if > that matters.)Samba 3 doesn't insist on OL 2.2.23; previous versions will work o.k., but most of them are not adjudged as stable and are probably not suitable for 24x7 production systems. including 2.1.30 with BDB 4.1 backends..>> Learn that OpenLDAP 2.2.23 needs Sleepycat BDB 4.2.52 (2 x >> patched), maybe Cyrus SASL 2.1.20. Furthermore, that you need to >> configure DB_CONFIG to use it at all. >> > Well, can you reconcile that with the recommendation I just read to > use no database for a user like me with a single Samba server that wants to > pass on all authentication to an Active Directory server per the article > in the December "SysAdmin" magazine, at www.samag.com/documents/sam0414e/?For me, LDAP is the starting point. As I wrote, the initial motivation is production use for authenticating in Unix/desktop logins, e-mail, etc. with a a single password. There are many other bonuses, too. Samba came afterward - if it hadn't worked with the already-existent LDAP infrastructure, it would have been useless. For *everything* else, if you're not into LDAP, get things (Unix/desktop logins, e-mail, Samba, whatever) working without a DB first; then try implementing LDAP into each service by turn. --Tonni -- mail: tonye@billy.demon.nl http://www.billy.demon.nl