DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=jfq++9KlPMUetv+cvY4Nk8lcRhDDM202gNj8qJxx/yi7J0uCSFgeM
	OMQJhxQ2KfPbc8A9rOkdNh8EXXRusFTWEVv84N3SQDf73TshkGDbO6QT2lzZD7bK
	pRMyXZL8hx5JkSFxKrmVthNMK3R5OX19FeGtvjNQb/SW/s3LtZRMjk=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:55:21 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: RFC: 1.7.33 problem with user's home directory
Message-ID: <20141111165521.GU2782@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <20141110205216.GJ2782@calimero.vinschen.de> <0B8D23F7-0258-472D-BF38-860402FD3CDC@etr-usa.com> <20141111101821.GO2782@calimero.vinschen.de> <loom.20141111T112847-576@post.gmane.org> <20141111111437.GB28012@calimero.vinschen.de> <87tx25u1o6.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="V4yrq4dHtCqH+JvC"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87tx25u1o6.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

--V4yrq4dHtCqH+JvC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Nov 11 17:44, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> >> Looks good, but maybe allow the AD attribute to be explicitly named (e=
.g.
> >> cygwinHomeDirectory).
> >
> > Cygwin schema extension? :)
>=20
> I don't see why not, given that there's the possibility of having
> different information for Windows, Cygwin and UNIX in the same AD.

It's a bit complicated.  You need a way to distinguish the name of an
attribute from simple values like "home", or "cygwin" as Andrey
proposes.  My simply Cygwin-internal LDAP interface has no way of
providing arbitrary attribute strings either, so that needs to be
extended first.

Microsoft themselves use XML strings in some attribute blobs for
TS settings and stuff, so maybe the description field should be
sufficient.  I'm wondering if we really need other attributes then.

> But
> more realistically, one of the extensionAttributes that Exchange plugs
> in anyway could keep that information.

I have no experience with Exchange, so I can't tell.


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--V4yrq4dHtCqH+JvC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=n872
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--V4yrq4dHtCqH+JvC--