konstantin's patches now in RPM

[Joe L. <jl...@op...>]

I've place my python-ldap-*-3 RPMs (i386 and src) for RedHat 7.1 on
Open-IT.org. Yes, they now include the full patches in all their glory.
Enjoy. Remember, these are built against python 1.5.2


On Fri, 25 May 2001, Joe Little wrote:

> included are ldap/lber swig files (uses swig 1.3a5 or whatever the late=
st
> snapshot is..). They _compile_ against both OpenLDAP 2.0.x and mozilla
> ldap sdk 5.0. They only match Sascha's current swig files and do not as
> yet address other API needs. It is a work in progress, but I wnated to
> post it. You can grap Sasha's swig-ldap package and replace the
> ldap/lber.i files (remember to erase *_swap.c!) and then "make" it.
>
> On Fri, 25 May 2001, Michael Str=F6der wrote:
>
> > Joe Little wrote:
> > >
> > > I do understand that openldap 1.x is being maintained by OpenLDAP, =
but the
> > > distribution sets no longer maintain such. Thus any software create=
d with
> > > the hope for inclusion in a distro (like my management software ide=
as)
> > > need to be on the current build set.
> >
> > I disagree. E.g. recent S.u.S.E. Linux 7.1 ships with both libs and
> > python-ldap 1.10a3. I think Red Hat does also. Not sure about
> > Debian.
> >
> > Believe me I have exactly the same problems with 1st-level-support
> > for web2ldap.
> >
> > > I'll need to look further into the 2.x thread-safe issues. It would=
 appear
> > > from various notes/code that OpenLDAP 2.0.7 and beyond is now threa=
d-safe.
> >
> > No, it isn't.
> >
> > > I saw your message from before. Is there anything more current that
> > > confirms/refutes that?
> >
> > This message by Kurt Zeilenga was at the time 2.0.7 was already out.
> > Please re-read it. Note that there are still significant changes
> > with the OpenLDAP 2.0.x releases. You can't stick to 2.0.7 (2.0.11
> > was released yesterday).
> >
> > Regarding re-entrant LDAP libs Kurt mentioned ldap_r which provides
> > sort of a re-entrant lib but not without taking special care in the
> > LDAP application's C code. It might be a solution to wrap this into
> > a low-level API and write a thread-safe wrapper class around it.
> >
> > > I also DLed the newly minted ldapsdk5.0 for mozilla, and will work =
on the
> > > SWIG stuff there.
> >
> > According to various messages by Kurt Zeilenga and others this is
> > the only thread-safe LDAP lib.
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Re: [ldap] LDAP C SDK's thread-safe?
> > Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 09:08:29 -0400
> > From: mc...@ne... (Mark C Smith)
> > Organization: iPlanet E-Commerce Solutions
> > To: mi...@st...
> >
> > Just found this in my overflowing inbox... the Netscape/Mozilla SDK
> > is
> > multithread safe, although in older versions you must write and
> > install
> > some callback functions to allow for safe sharing of one LDAP *
> > session
> > handle among multiple threads.  This is documented.
> >
> > -Mark
> > -----------------------------------
> >
> > > The OpenLDAP 2.x include files give swig indigestion. My
> > > current approach to this whole mess is the get a passable swig modu=
le for
> > > some LDAP v3 library working, and then work with python-ldap (ie yo=
u?) to
> > > build toward a stable solution.
> >
> > Feel free to send me code for testing. Please mention the SWIG
> > version it requires. I have currently installed swig-1.3a5.
> >
> > > Once we have a working v3 backend to
> > > python-ldap, it will be easier to code for the differences in each =
SDK.
> > > This is why I DLed the mozilla one, since it was one you felt was m=
ost
> > > complete. If we can move on that, we have something to work with.
> >
> > I'd suggest to write low-level SWIG-wrappers around each LDAP C SDK
> > and write a nice Python class API for common use above it. So you
> > don't have to deal with the dirty details at the C level. Just wrap
> > 1:1 *everything* in libldap and libber and let me do the
> > higher-level abstraction.
> >
> > > At the same time, I'll be using the current python-ldap w/ openldap=
 2.x
> > > patches to work on the ZopeLDAP adaptor and that code. I hope to ge=
t the
> > > sdk bit done this weekend, and devote a good week to the Zope code.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure Jens will catch up quickly and modify the ZopeLDAP
> > stuff if there's a new usable API. Leave that part up to him.
> >
> > > That is where I stand, and I hope its agreeable to you. My hand is
> > > "raised" on the maintenance issue, I am still just unsure of how be=
st to
> > > tackle the problem.
> >
> > Since you are able to produce the SWIG wrapper code simply stick to
> > that. Leave the Python part to me and the Zope part to Jens. Is that
> > clear enough?
> >
> > Ciao, Michael.
> >
>