Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > > --On Thursday, July 28, 2005 7:18 PM +0200 Michael Ströder > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Michael Ströder wrote: >> >>> If I'm using option -f slapd.conf and -F configdir/ together which >>> config data is authorative? >>> [..] >>> My conclusion: >>> Drop -f slapd.conf completely in 2.3.x and rather develop good setup >>> tools... >> >> Well, same question for file DB_CONFIG and attribute 'olcDbConfig'... > > I can't see -f going away until at least *everything* supports the new > config backend, which it doesn't. > > Besides which point, when I do testing of various setups, I use -f > extensively to switch between configuration files on the same host, > which is a lot simpler than mucking around with various config > backends. Other people may want to keep their slapd.conf files for > things like version control, etc, as well.
Quanah, I do see all the advantages of slapd.conf mentioned above. But I also see the issues with inconsistencies and user confusion. Arent' you then questioning usefulness of back-config in general? Also the admin guide has to describe both methods not making it more readable for beginners (although Howard did a great job updating it). BTW: Testing various setups by using -F with different directories is as easy as using -f. And you can check in the configdir/ tree to CVS as well without problem. Furthermore if in the future ACLs and access/audit logging is implemented for back-config you have a much more powerful instrument to track configuration changes than CVS for slapd.conf. => One has to decide which route to go and after that one has to follow that route consequently to avoid inconsistencies and double effort. Ciao, Michael.
