openldap-bugs May 2007

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

42 participants
156 discussions

Re: (ITS#4937) chain overlay bugs with Statslog & ldbm/ldif databases
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 09 May '07

09 May '07

hyc(a)symas.com writes: > This seems to be a known limitation, see the FIXME in slapd/compare.c, > near SLAP_COMPARE_IN_FRONTEND. At least, that explains the problem > for back-ldif, which does not provide its own compare entry point. Looks like a bug to me, and that the correct fix is be to delete that code and let the current back-ldif return an error. Maybe it could be split out to a separate function which backends can set be_compare to if they have a be_attribute(), or something like that? > As for back-ldbm, there is a missing referral_rewrite call in > back-ldbm/referral.c. I don't consider it worthwhile to fix back-ldbm, > but you're welcome to fix it if you wish. I might, though actually I'm more concerned with failed tests than fixing ldbm at the moment:-) Will look later. However: > Just have a look at back-bdb/referral.c for the correct code. There is no correct code as yet, note the bogus logging I mentioned. -- Regards, Hallvard

1 0

(ITS#4951) [contrib] RADIUS password module fixes
by richton＠nbcs.rutgers.edu 08 May '07

08 May '07

Full_Name: Aaron Richton Version: HEAD OS: irrelevant URL: https://www.nbcs.rutgers.edu/~richton/richton-20070508-radius.patch Submission from: (NULL) (68.196.250.105) Please find at this address a patch against the RADIUS contrib module. This patch addresses two issues: * libradius makes use of MT-Unsafe calls, so a protecting mutex is added. * config_filename could be passed to rad_config without initialization (when accepting the default). I, Aaron Richton, hereby place these modifications to OpenLDAP Software (and only these modifications) into the public domain. Hence, these modifications may be freely used and/or redistributed for any purpose with or without attribution and/or other notice.

1 0

Re: (ITS#4947) monitor schema should appear under subschema entry
by ahasenack＠terra.com.br 08 May '07

08 May '07

On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 08:42:24PM +0200, Pierangelo Masarati wrote: > ahasenack(a)terra.com.br wrote: > > > The monitor backend attributes and object classes, when loaded, should also be > > exported in the subschema entries at the server. > > > > I know of one ldap client that breaks because of this: luma. It says it can't > > display the cn=monitor entries because it doesn't know the object classes or > > attributes. I guess it uses this info to determine how to show each entry. > > The schema is not exposed since it's considered experimental. To expose > it, you need to #define LDAP_DEVEL. It doesn't see a good idea for me to define LDAP_DEVEL just to get this schema published: probably many other things in openldap would change.

1 0

Re: (ITS#4947) monitor schema should appear under subschema entry
by ando＠sys-net.it 08 May '07

08 May '07

ahasenack(a)terra.com.br wrote: > The monitor backend attributes and object classes, when loaded, should also be > exported in the subschema entries at the server. > > I know of one ldap client that breaks because of this: luma. It says it can't > display the cn=monitor entries because it doesn't know the object classes or > attributes. I guess it uses this info to determine how to show each entry. The schema is not exposed since it's considered experimental. To expose it, you need to #define LDAP_DEVEL. p. Ing. Pierangelo Masarati OpenLDAP Core Team SysNet s.r.l. via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA http://www.sys-net.it --------------------------------------- Office: +39 02 23998309 Mobile: +39 333 4963172 Email: pierangelo.masarati(a)sys-net.it ---------------------------------------

1 0

Re: (ITS#4949) olcLogLevel not functioning as expected after conversion via '-f slapd.conf -F slapd.d'
by erici＠motown.cc.utexas.edu 07 May '07

07 May '07

On Fri, 4 May 2007, hyc(a)symas.com wrote: >> Either the conversion should put all of the loglevel masks in the same >> olcLogLevel value or cn=config should AND all of the olcLogLevel values. > > You mean OR of course, not AND. Yes, sorry. OR, +, mask, that's what I mean. It must have been Friday. -- Eric Irrgang - UT Austin ITS Unix Systems - (512)475-9342

1 0

Re: (ITS#4950) error LDAP Server
by quanah＠zimbra.com 07 May '07

07 May '07

--On Monday, May 07, 2007 11:03 AM +0000 thuanpvm(a)blitzgrp.com wrote: > Full_Name: Phan Van Minh Thuan > Version: 2.3.35 > OS: Linux Enterprise 4.0 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (58.186.92.53) > > > Dear Sirs, > > When I submit ldapadd -x -D "cn=Manager, dc=blitzcie,dc=dyndns,dc=org" -W > -f /usr/local/etc/openldap/schema/initial.ldif, the error display: > Enter LDAP password: > ldap_bin: Can't contact LDAP server (-1) > > Looking forward to hearing from you soon The ITS system is for submitting bugs about the software. You appear to be having a configuration/usage problem. Please subscribe to openldap-software(a)openldap.org and describe the problems you are having there. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

(ITS#4950) error LDAP Server
by thuanpvm＠blitzgrp.com 07 May '07

07 May '07

Full_Name: Phan Van Minh Thuan Version: 2.3.35 OS: Linux Enterprise 4.0 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (58.186.92.53) Dear Sirs, When I submit ldapadd -x -D "cn=Manager, dc=blitzcie,dc=dyndns,dc=org" -W -f /usr/local/etc/openldap/schema/initial.ldif, the error display: Enter LDAP password: ldap_bin: Can't contact LDAP server (-1) Looking forward to hearing from you soon Many Thanks. Thuan

1 0

Re: (ITS#4933) syncrepl unlimited timeout vs. .ldaprc
by hyc＠symas.com 04 May '07

04 May '07

donn(a)u.washington.edu wrote: > Full_Name: Donn Cave > Version: 2.4.4 > OS: Red Hat RHEL 3 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (128.95.135.150) > > > Appears to me that unless timelimit value passed to ldap_search_ext() is > positive, the ld_timelimit from .ldaprc overrides, so there's no way for > syncrepl ldap_sync_search() to literally specify "unlimited". > > To duplicate: configure syncrepl timelimit=unlimited; edit /.ldaprc -> > "TIMELIMIT 23"; start replica slapd with a sufficiently large replication > backlog; observe timeout at 23 seconds. > > To kludge: use extravagantly large value instead: if (si->si_tlimit > 0) > timeout.tv_sec = si->tlimit; else timeout.tv_sec = 31536000; > > and pass &timeout unconditionally. Hmmm. I guess this is a consequence of changing the timeout representation in the LDAP handle. I suppose we can just make the syncrepl consumer do an explicit ldap_set_option() on its session handles to override any .ldaprc setting. Will have to play with this a bit to see how we can maintain backward compatibility. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#4948) #if/#elif argument in .../include/ac/time.h
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 04 May '07

04 May '07

lucio(a)proxima.alt.za writes: > Whether the existing format is legitimate or not is a matter for the C > standards, but I believe that the alternative would be both clearer > and more portable. It's legitimate. In #if/#elif statements, an undefined macro (without arguments) has the value 0 in a correct compiler. That said, it's indeed a reasonable cleanup. I'll do that and some others shortly. Allows us to compile with 'gcc -Wundef' without too much noise too. I'll tests I'm not sure about alone (in particular Windows stuff), in case it's supposed to be OK to compile with '-D<macro name>=0' so a change from #if to #ifdef would change OpenLDAP's behavior. Maybe someone else can have a look at that. > The Plan 9 C pre-processor has a definite issue with it and it seems a > reasonable change to implement. There may be other places where a > similar change would be beneficial, I'll identify them as I > encountered and will provide a comprehensive list on demand. Please be specific: Give the exact error/warning message, and make clear whether it _is_ a warning or an error. BTW, will 9 C accept this (when you do not define FOO/BAR)? What error/warning messages, if any? #if defined(FOO) && FOO /* Guard #if FOO with defined(FOO) */ int main() { return 2; } #elif BAR int main() { return 1; } #else int main() { return 0; } #endif -- Regards, Hallvard

1 0

Re: (ITS#4949) olcLogLevel not functioning as expected after conversion via '-f slapd.conf -F slapd.d'
by hyc＠symas.com 04 May '07

04 May '07

erici(a)motown.cc.utexas.edu wrote: > Full_Name: Eric Irrgang > Version: 2.3.35 > OS: Solaris 9 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (128.83.93.52) > > > When a slapd.conf file is converted to cn=config with -f and -F the loglevel > parameter gets converted into multiple olcLogLevel=keyword attribute/value > pairs. However, only the last one in the configuration seems to apply. > Manually updating > dn: cn=config > changetype: modify > replace: olcLogLevel > olcLogLevel: keyword1 keyword2 ... > - > > gets the intended logging behavior. > > Either the conversion should put all of the loglevel masks in the same > olcLogLevel value or cn=config should AND all of the olcLogLevel values. You mean OR of course, not AND. Yes, the code only does ORs correctly when multiple levels are set at once. Oops. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs May 2007