On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 23:45 +0200, Stian Jordet wrote: > But after reading the documentation, it seems I now have to use two > ldap-fields to achieve the same thing? One "quota" and one "quota_rule"? > Is this correct? It's of course not impossible, but it's kinda a hassle > to hand craft a new schema, deploy, and update all the user's entries. > > If my users didn't have two kind of quotas, it would be easy, but with > two quota methods, I don't see any other way than to use two > ldap-fields. Which I hope I don't have to :)
Well.. If your virtual users don't all have the same quota then yes,
you'll have to use two fields. Otherwise you could kludge around it :)
plugin {
quota_rule = *:storage=2G
}
Then have LDAP return quota=fs:noenforcing or quota=maildir.
Or alternatively if your system users are also in /etc/passwd, or you're
using nss_ldap or something, you could do something like:
userdb passwd {
args = quota=fs:noenforcing
}
userdb ldap {
args = ..
}
plugin {
quota = maildir
}
And return quota_rule from ldap.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
