****Re: openldap + kmail

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 12:39 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 14:53 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:19 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 23:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 20:45 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> > > > > > If there had been a single example given in this case
> > > > > > it would have been obvious what the program was looking for.
> > > > > > One example is worth a thousand words.
> > > > > ----
> > > > > the issue with kaddressbook is the same issue with all ldap
> > > > > clients...once you understand how ldap works, setting up a client like
> > > > > kaddressbook is no big deal. Basically, everything is a client to LDAP
> > > > > whether it's postfix/sendmail/cyrus/kaddressbook/evolution/etc. There
> > > > > really is no functional difference because they all use LDAP protocol
> > > > > to
> > > > > access and get what they need.
> > > > > 
> > > > > What you are calling a lack of documentation suggests that you expect
> > > > > all the various LDAP client programs to tell you how LDAP works.
> > > > 
> > > > It's not unreasonable to ask for an example. The average user has zero
> > > > interest in finding out how LDAP works, and a lot of interest in getting
> > > > his contacts working.
> > > ----
> > > Yes - it actually is unreasonable since there is no standard way of
> > > setting up LDAP address books. 
> > > 
> > > Since we seem to keep having this discussion...let me restate so we are
> > > clear.
> > > 
> > > There simply is no standard for LDAP address books.
> > > 
> > > There simply is no standard way to set anything up in LDAP...it's an
> > > erector set.
> > 
> > I understand that perfectly well. However the question was not "how do I
> > set up a general-purpose address book" but "how do I set up an
> > address-book that Kmail will accept" and my suggestion of an example was
> > also specific to Kmail. Clearly the OP solved the problem by setting up
> > his address book in a certain way. Why can't what way be documented as
> > an example in the Kmail documentation (*not* the LDAP documentation)?
> ----
> What is the difference between a 'general-purpose address book' and a
> 'specific-purpose Kmail address book' that uses an LDAP backend?
> 
> I would submit that there is no difference but that they are one and the
> same. 

The OP's system didn't work with one configuration, and now does work
with a different configuration (apparently the trick is to have a field
"DN: Address Book" as part of the record). What is the problem with
simply stating this in the Kmail docs? Maybe the field has to be there
for every other address-book application out there, maybe not, but the
fact that it's a general recommendation doesn't take away from it also
being a specific recommendation.

poc