On 07/19/2012 10:28 AM, Gary Algier wrote:
Hi,

I am in the process of migrating from Sun's DS 5.2 to DS 389 and I have compared the schemata. I see some differences and I wonder as to the best way to handle them. In general is it better to change the 389 schema and then always have to "fix" it with each new release or change my Sun clients somehow (this seems to border on the philosophical)?

As an example, there is the Automount schema. On Sun's systems, they expect something schema like this: objectClasses: ( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.17 NAME 'automount' MUST ( automountKey $ automountInformation ) MAY description ...)
with the 389 schema looking like this:
objectclasses: ( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.17 NAME 'automount' MUST ( cn $ automountInformation ) MAY description ...)

In other words, the lookup key matched against the user's login for home directories would be "automountKey" for Sun, and "cn" for 389.

Looks like Sun is using the RFC 2307 bis schema? Try this - remove the default /etc/dirsrv/slapd-INSTANCE/schema/10rfc2307.ldif schema, and instead copy in the /usr/share/dirsrv/ldif/10rfc2307bis.ldif


I notice that my Linux clients work fine with a Sun DS so they seem to be using "automountKey". (Or are they looking for either?).

I also see differences in the objectClass automountMap. Linux does not seem to work with a Sun-style autmountMap.

If I just dump my Sun DS and load it into the 389 DS do I want to overwrite the schema? Should I only load the non-conflicting entries? If the 389 schema is the "right" schema, will Linux stop working some day when they conform? Is there a way to have both?

I have about 500 mixed Sun and Linux clients and I want to minimize the reconfiguration on the day that I switch DS.


--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Reply via email to