This makes me think about all the SSL settings we have, too.  Why not have a
single and homogeneous USE_SSL variable, and remove all other that are specific
to packages (*_USE_SSL)?


On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 13:52:23 +0200
Quentin Garnier <cube@NetBSD.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I noticed there is an inconsistency with the use of USE_LDAP and
> USE_OPENLDAP in pkgsrc.
> 
> Only USE_OPENLDAP is defined in bsd.pkg.defaults.mk.
> 
> A few packages have their own LDAP setting, namely the Postfix ones,
> pine, the Samba ones, and heidmal and proftpd, but for those last two it
> is commented out.
> 
> Even though the way the two variables are used doesn't reflect this,
> they have different meanings, USE_OPENLDAP referring to a specific
> implementation of LDAP.  It would be justified for a package that has
> LDAP capabilities, but doesn't necessarily depend on openldap, to define
> USE_LDAP, and concurrently USE_OPENLDAP.
> 
> Since openldap is the only LDAP library used by USE_LDAP packages, it
> won't change anything in a near future if we go on the all USE_LDAP or
> all USE_OPENLDAP roads.
> 
> I'd prefer using USE_OPENLDAP, there might be an actual use for USE_LDAP
> later.
> 
> Also, for postfix, pine and samba, I think they should respect
> USE_OPENLDAP instead of having their own setting.  That way,
> 'USE_OPENLDAP=yes' is a way to turn on LDAP support for a host.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Quentin Garnier.
> 


-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv@menta.net>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/