I found smbldap-tools came with samba however due to bug 83203. I would suggest that move smbldap-tools out from the samba ebuild and create a new ebuild just for smbldap-tools. For one reason, smbldap-tools and samba are from different source, and their update time are different. It would be wise to do so. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
I tend to agree with that, smbldap did cause a lot of trouble lately ... Christian, what do you think of it ?
I think you're right. :-) If there's no hurry, I can take care of the new ebuild (and the conversion of the samba ebuilds) in 2-3 days.
Oh That would be really helpful :) Thank Guys.
net-nds/smbldap-tools in portage tree. It has to be tested a while, but I think it could be the official choice for the upcoming samba-3.0.12. Comments?
Looks good here so far. The location problem has been resolved as well. Thx.
samba-3.0.12 is out, and uses the external package net-nds/smbldap-tools. So, if there's something wrong, it's all my fault :-)
It would be very nice to note in the samba ebuild that functionality has been removed from the package. As it was not such a nice suprise to find out after an (necessary) upgrade to 3.0.13 that these script where removed. besides that what's with the location of the scripts in /opt? and its config file in /etc/opt (which is a change from the samba build as well)? Source is under GPL so why?
/opt and /etc/opt in smbldap-tools: upstream (idealx.org's) choice, for better adeherence to File System Hierarchy standard smbldap-tools external package notice: a warn is raised in 3.0.12 and 3.0.13 (triggered from 'ldap' use flag). I know samba has a longer list of warnings than I'd prefer: if anyone has better ideas to notify the installing user, please let me now.
suggestion: make smbldap-tools a PDEPEND of the sambas which don't install those built-in any more. Incidentally, samba-3.0.10 doesn't install them either. Also -- as much as the upstream people like this /opt/IDEALX nonsense, it doesn't make the scripts useable. When they were part of the samba ebuild, they worked out of the box pretty much. Not so any more, sadly.
Now, an additional note about install locations. If you look at the .spec file that comes _as part of the original source tarball_ you see that they replace sysconfdir with something sensible. So, if you follow upstream, then you should follow their build procedure as outlined in their own spec file
seeing no action from you guys on this, I put 0.9.1-r1 into portage and removed all priors. This version installs into FHS-correct, proper locations (as specified in upstream's spec file, for example).
