Re: max open files

Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dan Pritts<[email protected]>  writes:
>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 04:38:32PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> Out of fairness want to note that the most significant component of the
>>> problems with the OpenLDAP packages for Debian (and Ubuntu, to a
>>> somewhat lesser degree) is that the packaging team has basically no
>>> resources.
>
>> Interesting about the Debian situation.  Another reminder to me of why I
>> don't use Debian; the project's concerns about absolute "freedom" don't
>> mesh with my concerns about getting real work done.
>
> Well, I certainly won't debate that here, but just to be clear, nothing
> that I said has anything whatsoever to do with Debian's definition of
> freedom or free software.  Debian doesn't object to OpenSSL for any
> grounds related to free software definitions or licensing.  Everyone
> agrees that the licenses of all software involved qualify as free
> software.
>
> Debian doesn't distribute GPL'd software linked (via OpenLDAP) to OpenSSL
> because we believe doing so would be *illegal*.  Not non-free, not falling
> astray of some Debian licensing principle, but an actual legal violation
> of the OpenSSL and GPL licenses for which we could be sued.
>
> If you build the software yourself against OpenSSL but don't distribute
> it, the relevant clause of the GPL doesn't apply and there is no issue.

Getting far into digression here, but this is another reason to switch to the 
nssov / nss-pam-ldapd model. Remove libldap from PAM/NSS and a lot of these 
linking issues disappear.

-- 
   -- Howard Chu
   CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
   Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
   Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/