Re: pkg/49804

[Benny Siegert <bsiegert%gmail.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR pkg/49804; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Benny Siegert <bsiegert%gmail.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: pkg-manager%netbsd.org@localhost,
 gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost,
 pkgsrc-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost,
 ef%math.uni-bonn.de@localhost,
 ftigeot%wolfpond.org@localhost,
 Havard Eidnes <he%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: pkg/49804
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 13:59:22 +0100

 >> I noticed that pkgsrc-wip already contained a package for =
 nss-pam-ldap.
 > When I looked at it three years ago, that could only possibly work on =
 Linux.
 
 It looks like he@ (Havard Eidnes) is actually maintaining the package in =
 wip (into which I merged your changes) and has updated it to the latest =
 version. I propose handing this over to him to decide. My proposal is to =
 import as is after the freeze (see below).
 
 >> but it is a single package including the NSS module, the PAM module=20=
 
 >> and the daemon.
 > The point of going into the trouble of splitting it up (as discussed =
 on tech-pkg in december, 2013) was that almost every combination of the =
 components makes sense:
 > You may want to stick with nss_ldap, but switch to nss-pam-ldapd-pam =
 (or vice versa)
 > You may want PAM, but not NSS (or vice versa)
 > You may event want a client, but not the server because OpenLDAP has =
 an overlay (slapo-nssov, which is still in my queue of needing to be =
 pkgsrc-ed) speaking the same protocol.
 >=20
 > So I think three separate packages do make sense. At least for me.
 
 
 In general, there is nothing wrong with having all the stuff in one =
 package. Merely installing a PAM and/or NSS library does not mean that =
 you are going to use it. In both cases, you need to edit a configuration =
 file to enable them.
 
 =E2=80=94Benny.=