Re: [Evolution] LDAP Address Book Setup

[Tony Earnshaw <tonni billy demon nl>]

fre, 2002-08-16 kl. 14:43 skrev Chris Toshok:

> > No it doesn't! Even if people do as you say.
>
> It has always worked fine for me when doing normal port 389 non-TLS
> stuff...  Are you saying that isn't working for you?

> > 1: There's no ldaps possibility (e.g. one can change the port, but not
> > the service/protocol and TLS certificate verification);

Hi Chris!

Thanks for taking the trouble to reply - you must have enough to do
already.

> > No it doesn't! Even if people do as you say.
> It has always worked fine for me when doing normal port 389 non-TLS
> stuff...  Are you saying that isn't working for you?

Works for my own server, not for Internet (Bigfoot, Netcenter) but then
neither do Netscape 4.7 or Mozilla 1.0, so it's probably my dialup
connection

> which version are you talking about?  version 1.1.x has had a UI for
> selecting TLS for some time now.  Are you saying that the UI isn't
> clear?

No, not at all. The last time I looked on the Ximian site, it was still
1.0.8 - so that's what I have; I haven't seen any 1.1 stuff. I need Red
Hat rpms for Evo; much stuff I compile myself and am mostly up to date
with that, but Linux is such a HUGE repositry, it's impossible to keep
up with everything.

About 1/2 of what I install as new is self-compiled, 1/2 rpms. I'm
talking about a single laptop here, what I have at home, but it does
everything a usual Internet server would do: firewall, ldap with
Berkeley4, BIND DNS 9.2, smtp with auth, encryption, ldap, pop with
encryption etc. etc. - plus Gnome with Open Office.org 1.0, cups, etc.
etc etc. And Evo.

Just so that you know it, nothing but nothing will ever get me off Evo.
The Open Office.org crowd are trying to make a groupware server product
with Mozilla libs, but from what I've read up to now it will be useless,
in my opinion. Pity Evo's not available for Windows32. So I take the
rough with the smooth.

> The location of the schema file wasn't communicated that well even to
> the people that *did* use the source instead of binary snapshots.  The
> reason being it was a hack and even when I wrote it I knew most of it
> would end up being deprecated eventually (parts of it already are -- the
> calendar/freebusy fields).

O.k., but without it Evo would be more or less useless as an
Outlook/Openldap replacement for Openldap servers. Congrats for what you
*have* done!

> Contact lists again will probably *not* use the format in the current
> evolutionPerson schema, and yes, there's a bug about the lack of them,
> and yes, it's slated for 1.2.

Great! Now I know that. I didn't till I, in my ignorance, opened my
mouth.

> First off, to expect a large ldap server to perform well at searches
> *without* indexing is just silly, so there's no use saying that
> evolution alone requires it.

I never wrote that, did I? I index whatever's available. Anyway, I don't
have a large ldap server. I think it was Adam Williams who wrote that.

> If your ldap server is just for your own
> contacts you probably don't need any additional indexing unless you're
> one of those odd people with 20k contacts.

I'm not.

> I never added indices for my
> local server here until I started stress testing things and upped the
> number of entries to 100k, and things weren't adversely affected by
> their absence.

When a client asks for an Evo contact by name, you don't have to search
on all possible objectclasses and attributes, do you? That's what you're
doing with 1.0.8. When I do and ldapsearch (Openldap client), it's
normally enough with max. 1 objectclass and 2 attributes - and for me
those are always indexed. 
 
> And you're right - evolution is still being worked on.

Course it is. As I've said before, there are 600 million years at least
until Armageddon (for me Ragnarok), so you've plenty of time yet.

> The initial
> LDAPS/TLS code went in a long time ago, and I was pulled away to work on
> other things and couldn't get back to finishing it up.  But it does no
> one any good to act like it's the end of the world and say it's nowhere
> near good yet when I just fixed the TLS problems and committed the fixes
> tonight.  Relax :)

I'm still looking for Evo 1.1 rpms, including libraries, that will
install on Gnome 1.4.

Thanks for fantastic software :-)

Best and thanks again,

Tony

-- 

Tony Earnshaw

The usefulness of RTFM is vastly overrated.

e-post:         tonni billy demon nl
www:            http://www.billy.demon.nl
gpg public key: http://www.billy.demon.nl/tonni.armor

Telefoon:       (+31) (0)172 530428
Mobiel:         (+31) (0)6 51153356

GPG Fingerprint = 3924 6BF8 A755 DE1A 4AD6 FA2B F7D7 6051 3BE7 B981
3BE7B981