Openldap server install failure - openldap client conflict

[Da Rock]

On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 16:48 +1000, Da Rock wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 07:03 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > Da Rock wrote:
> > > I'm trying to install OpenLDAP as a server to "attempt" to try it out
> > > for our network. The problem is the openldap client is already installed
> > > for other apps as php, apache, asterisk, etc. So my question is: is it
> > > possible to uninstall the client? Will the server include the client
> > > required for these other apps?
> > 
> > The client installs libldap.so and liblber.so (plus variants based on
> > OpenLDAP version and ABI version) -- like so for OpenLDAP 2.3:
> > 
> > /usr/local/lib/liblber-2.3.so
> > /usr/local/lib/liblber-2.3.so.2
> > /usr/local/lib/liblber.a
> > /usr/local/lib/liblber.la
> > /usr/local/lib/liblber.so
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap-2.3.so
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap-2.3.so.2
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap.a
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap.la
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap.so
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap_r-2.3.so
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap_r-2.3.so.2
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap_r.a
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap_r.la
> > /usr/local/lib/libldap_r.so
> > 
> > (OpenLDAP 2.4 does similarly except replace '2.3' with '2.4')  If you
> > force uninstall openldap-client, then everything depending on it will
> > refuse to run because of the unfulfilled shlib dynamic linkage.
> > 
> > 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.  Also -- handy tip -- 
> > adding flags like the following to /etc/make.conf will generally enable
> > LDAP and SASL capabilities for any ports that can support them.  (SASL highly
> > recommended for securing access to LDAP, and also LDAP highly recommended
> > as a back-end for SASL...)
> > 
> > WITH_SASL=      yes
> > WITH_LDAP=	yes
> > WANT_OPENLDAP_VER=      23
> > WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=     yes
> > 
> > However, don't insert the 'WANT_OPENLDAP_VER' line into /etc/make.conf
> > until /after/ you've got the right openldap-client port installed, as it
> > screws up switching between versions.
> > 
> > 23 is the default stable release, 24 is also available but still in beta.
> > 
> 
> 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?

Actually, let me clarify: The error message I get is
openldap-sasl-server-2.3.40 conflicts with installed package
openldap-client-2.3.40, they install files into the same place.

Therefore, I cannot install openldap server 2.3.40

> 
> > > 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?
> 
> > If your aim is to interoperate with ActiveDirectory then I believe that is
> > possible at the LDAP level via the usual delegation and referral mechanisms.
> > It may even be possible to replicate either to or from AD or to use OpenLDAP
> > (+ Kerberos + Samba v4 I think) as a drop in replacement for AD.  I have no
> > direct knowledge of that, but I'm sure a little Google action will turn up
> > any number of HowTos on the subject.
> > 
> 
> Replacing a Windows server would be a nice goal... I will succeed on
> that one in the near future- just not this project.
> 
> Thanks for the help.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>