break up cyclic dependency openldap21 <-> cyrus-sasl2

[Oliver Eikemeier]

Hi Guys,
>>>>> [OE:]
>>>>>I'm trying to enable OpenLDAP 2.1 SASL support. [...]
>>>>>I've got a cyclic dependency cyrus-sasl-2.1.12 ->
>>>>>openldap21-2.1.16 -> cyrus-sasl-2.1.12. Obvioulsy portupgrade doesn't
>>>>>like cyclic dependencies. FreeBSD Porter's Handbook
>>>>><http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/>
>>>>>does not mention this, so I am stuck.
>>>>
>>>[...] I think we have to address the
>>>dependency problem too. Splitting up cyrus-sasl and saslauthd looks
>>>like a good plan to me, [...]
>>
>> [GM:]
>>I just ran into the same problem myself -- I would like to compile OpenLDAP
>>with SASL support, and I don't really need saslauthd, so the direction of
>>dependency in the ports collection is backwards for me.
> 
> [CK:]
> I was going to whip up a saslauthd-ldap port but can't currently find
> time to do it.
> 
> On the other hand there is a new openldap version just released and
> I would like to get the other parts of the patch committed. So I will
> reverse the dependency to make sasl optional again and send a new pr updated
> to openldap-2.1.19 over the weekend.

In my opinion a cyrus-saslauthd port would be a good solution (Actually no
saslauthd-ldap port, because ldap is optional for saslauthd) with dependencies:

- cyrus-saslauthd -> cyrus-sasl2
- optional: cyrus-saslauthd -> openldap20/21
- optional: openldap21 -> cyrus-sasl2

(A -> B: A depends on B)

This should work, the only references to ldap in cyrus-sasl2 are in the
saslauthd part. Having said that this dependency scheme is a little crude,
but the best I can come up with. Any other ideas, or should we discuss this
with the cyrus and openldap people?

Regards
    Oliver