Re: Fwd: Enable Version 2 Support for Solaris 9

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 11:45 PM 5/1/2005, BusyBoy wrote:
>I have a SUN SPARC running Solaris 9  and I have Openldap software
>installed on it , which is I guess for LDAP v3 and when I try to
>replicate my old  LDAP Server's schema and configurations files ,, I
>get errors like this.
>
>/opt/sfw/etc/openldap/slapd-conf/slapd.ptml.conf: line 1: old
>attribute type format not supported.
>line 2 (attribute homeCountry                           cis)
>/opt/sfw/etc/openldap/slapd-conf/slapd.ptml.conf: line 2: old
>attribute type format not supported.
>line 3 (attribute       mailLocalAddress                        cis)
>/opt/sfw/etc/openldap/slapd-conf/slapd.ptml.conf: line 3: old
>attribute type format not supported.
>line 4 (attribute       mailRoutingAddress                      cis)
>/opt/sfw/etc/openldap/slapd-conf/slapd.ptml.conf: line 4: old
>attribute type format not supported.
>line 5 (attribute       mailHost                                cis)
>/opt/sfw/etc/openldap/slapd-conf/slapd.ptml.conf: line 5: old
>attribute type format not supported.
>
>Is there any way to enable v2 support for Openldap on solaris 9 so
>that I can start the LDAP server.

No.  While you can configure modern slapd(8) to accept
a LDAPv2 bind, you cannot configure a modern slapd(8)
to behave in accordance with the LDAPv2 technical
specification (however, it unlikely that your
applications actually expect real LDAPv2, they
probably expect an LDAPv3ish LDAPv2).  But, anyway,
that's has little to do with the above problem (because
it's not a LDAPv2 v. LDAPv3 issue, but an OpenLDAP 1.x v
OpenLDAP 2.x issue.

Modern slapd(8) have modern slapd.conf(5) files.  So you'll
need find or construct (from LDAPv3 schema descriptions)
appropriate schema files.  You likely should start by
searching the schema files that came with the software
as they might include most of what you're after.

I note that as so much has changed since 1.x and so little
1.x knowledge remains in the community, you likely are
better off not treating this as an upgrade between
versions of the same software package, but a migration
to a new software package. 

Kurt