Openldap server install failure - openldap client conflict

[Da Rock]

On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 08:29 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
> 
> Da Rock wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 07:03 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >> Da Rock wrote:
> 
> >> One of the programs that depends on the client is OpenLDAP-server -- so
> >> just by typing
> >>
> >>     portinstall net/openldap23-server
> >>
> >> you'll cause openldap23-client (or openldap23-sasl-client) to be installed
> >> as a normal consequence of ports dependency resolution.  The problem comes
> >> if you've already got, say, openldap23-client installed and you want
> >> openldap24-client -- other applications: Apache, PHP etc. will work with
> >> just about any LDAP version but openldap-server needs the matching client
> >> version.  The solution is something like this:
> >>
> >>    # portupgrade -o net/openldap24-client -f openldap-client-2.3.41
> >>    # portupgrade -fr openldap-client-2.4.8
> >>
> >> to switch from the 23 series to the 24 series.  
> 
> > So my question was if I install the server I'll get the client, and
> > you're saying yes? If thats the case then, why is it stopping because
> > the client is already installed?
> 
> Usually the problem there is either: that the openldap client that the openldap
> server requires is different to the one that is already installed, or else that
> the WANT_OPENLDAP_VER or other settings (particularly SASL related ones) in
> /etc/make.conf or from the OPTIONS dialog differ from one or other or both of
> the installed openldap-client and openldap-server.  Get everything in synch and
> it will all go smoothly.  
> 

Ahhhh! Thats more than likely the problem... I'll let you know if it
fails.

> >>> And while I'm here... I tried installing the odbc backend, but it
> >>> conflicts with other apps as well. How can I have both the libiodbc and
> >>> unixodbc at the same time for openldap server (requires libiodbc), php5,
> >>> etc?
> >> Do you really need the odbc *backend* for LDAP?  That allows LDAP to store
> >> its data in a MSSQL database somewhere -- which implies the data store is on
> >> a different server to the OpenLDAP instance.  That's not ideal for good
> >> performance.  Unless you know you have a specific need for one of the particular
> >> back-ends and certainly if you are a beginner with openldap, I'd strongly
> >> recommend sticking with the default local storage based on Berkeley DB.
> >>
> > 
> > Actually I thought it covered most sql servers not just mssql- if thats
> > the case then good bye for sure. I was interested in maybe mysql though-
> > this is not usable for that I take it?
> 
> I believe there is a direct SQL backend which would work with a locally
> installed instance of MySQL, or possibly various others (PostgreSQL, SQLite)
> Even so, it's not a magic solution to make LDAP work better -- quite the reverse
> in fact, as it adds extra layers of overhead.  It's one of those things where
> if you think you might possibly want it, then actually you don't -- only use it
> when you absolutely know you need it.

I thought it might be easier to administrate - no?