[Pkg-samba-maint] Re: samba 3.0.23d in debian etch

[Jamie ffolliott]

> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 06:03:41AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > > Is there a reason samba is linked against the old 
> libldap2 libraries
> > > (2.1.30)?   The current release of openldap is in etch, 
> in libldap-2.3-0
> > > (2.3.30).
> 
> > Well, the build dependency is on "libldap2-dev". I never 
> digged into 
> > all this so it's very needed to extend this question to other 
> > maintainers of the samba package.
> 
> > It is indeed strange that we build depend on libldap2-dev, which is 
> > the 2.1.* version of LDAP stuff.
> 
> > However, the openldap2.3 package which seems to be the recent LDAP 
> > stuff, does not provide any -dev package. I wonder what I'm missin 
> > ghere but without any doubt Steve will have the answer..:-)
> 
> OpenLDAP 2.1 is the only version that has been ported to 
> GNUTLS instead of OpenSSL, so it's the only version for which 
> Debian provides a -dev package.

Ok a -dev package would be a trivial thing, I can't see that being a big
issue.

Is there any info on why GNUTLS is a sticking point, over the tried-and-true
openssl libraries?

Why would that be, since Apache2.2 uses OpenSSL, and that's still part of
the distro.

A stable LDAP is more important to me than Apache, since ldap is the backend
for all unix and windows authentication on my network.

Could we not link against a more current version of openldap, should a -dev
package become available?
 
> Work to port OpenLDAP 2.3 to GNUTLS is underway, but 
> obviously won't be ready in time for etch.

I can appreciate that, but of course it will contain new bugs at first,
undoubtably.

I hear Samba4 is also working to provide a replacement for openldap, so this
GNUTLS work may not benefit us at all by the next Debian release.

Kind regards,
Jamie