5.1, 5.2, or 5.3???
curtis at npc-usa.com
Wed Sep 1 12:43:18 PDT 2004
On 01 Sep, 2004, at 11:44, Charles Swiger wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2004, at 1:58 PM, Curtis Vaughan wrote:
>> So, I have been told that I shouldn't put 5.x on a production box,
>> but on the other hand I need pam_ldap, nss_ldap support on my box,
>> which I have also been told is only available in 5.x.
> If you have reason to need PAM & NSS support for LDAP, yes, you need
> to be running 5.x, or else you might consider some Linux flavor as
> better serving your requirements.
>> Whereas this is to be a Postfix server, I would like to know, which
>> version of 5.x should I install, or perhaps there is a way to use
>> linux emulation for pam and nss under 4.x? If, however, 5.x I must
>> install, which would people recommend and what problems will I be
>> facing by putting it into production?
> Quite possibly, you won't encounter any problems.
> BTW, if your only requirement driving the need for LDAP is mail users,
> one can set up Postfix and SASL to talk to LDAP, as well as
> configuring IMAP/POP to use LDAP-based accounts. pam_ldap lets one
> have authenticated Unix-level users from LDAP accounts; if you don't
> need LDAP shell accounts, 4.x will be enough.
> Do not install 5.1; it's too old, too many bugs. 5.2.1 is probably
> the most stable version available now, but there are significant bumps
> between it and the 5.3 betas now available which make upgrading to
> what will be 5-STABLE somewhat difficult. If you've got the time to
> test the system, install a 5.3 beta. If you can wait two weeks, 5.3
> will become the preferred choice.
Just out of curiosity, what is going to happen in 2 weeks? Actually, I
have 5.3-Beta installed on it right now. So, maybe I'll just keep it,
but wait to put it into production.
More information about the freebsd-questions