> > No! > > I considered that at the outset of version 5 development and decided > against it after working on integrating the outdated code that was > included in the nss_ldap distribution. Unless the situation changes > significantly then I'm not likely to change my mind on this. > Does it mean that the nss_ldap is heavily outdated then? > I would have to write the nss code for "all" the possible sources > against a an API that is difficult to write for, partly because the > interface documentation is lousy. Not to mention that I'd then be at the > mercy of nss_ldap changes and bugs, and autofs would depend on a > configuration file that it doesn't control. > My primary concern was why should we (linux distro maintainers) support 2 things essentially doing the same? I did not mean you specifically. Maintaining the libnss* libraries should be (probably) job for someone else - you keep focused on the autofs-specific tasks. And if you think your nss_ldap is better, why should not it serve other purposes (like gathering user info from LDAP repository), too?
I mean, from the longer perspective, I believe we should merge these things. It is neither elegant nor transparent for normal sysadmins. > > Ian > > > Ondrej _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list autofs@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
