On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Xin LI wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 03/28/11 16:30, Doug Barton wrote: > > On 03/28/2011 14:20, Xin LI wrote: > >> On 03/28/11 13:57, Doug Barton wrote: > >>> On 03/28/2011 13:48, Xin LI wrote: > >>>> On 03/28/11 12:42, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >>>>> Yup. openldap-client-2.4.24 does fine. Looks like a bug in 2.4.25. > >>>>> I'll > >>>>> take a look at CHANGES and see if I can figure out what broke the > >>>>> inclusion of fetch(3) support if I get a bit of time. > >>>> > >>>> It seems that libldif now referenced the fetch support, and ironically > >>>> it seem be a bug but a feature :( > >>>> > >>>> I have decided to disable FETCH support from now on, since it's likely > >>>> to bring more problems. > >>>> > >>>> (If you would prefer to fix the problem for this specific problem, I > >>>> think adding a '-lfetch' would be sufficient; but, it seems to be > >>>> undesirable to depend fetch(3) unconditionally for all programs that > >>>> uses openldap). > >> > >>> I know next to nothing about how the openldap-client stuff works, so I'm > >>> sorry if these questions are silly. :) The biggest question is, does > >>> dirmngr compile after your change? The other question is that the only > >>> reason I have openldap installed at all is so that gnupg can use it to > >>> fetch keys from ldap keyservers. Will this still work when the FETCH > >>> option is no longer present? > >> > >> hmm... how do I test fetching from an ldap keyserver? > > > > I'll save you the trouble. :) I got your latest update and tested both > > scenarios myself, and the answer is that they both work. > > > > So now the question is, should the FETCH OPTION be removed altogether? I > > imagine that a lot of users will be at least as confused as I, and word > > is that PRs for other ports are already showing up. > > I think that's being used in some ldap utilities so it might broke some > applications that makes use of that? > > I'll add a note in UPDATING to document this.
I did not verified it, but suspect that libldap.so linking line missed -lfetch. Note, that I mean the libldap.so linking, and not linking of the utilities depended on libldap.
pgpDrJ0VLZI26.pgp
Description: PGP signature
