openldap-bugs August 2010

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

23 participants
68 discussions

Re: (ITS#6616) back-sql crashing
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 07 Aug '10

07 Aug '10

> Attempting to create an inetOrgPerson interface to a proprietary database > schema. > Obviously something wrong at this stage, causes slapd to SEGV. > > gdb tells me that in servers/slapd/back-sql/entry-id.c:backsql_id2entry() > bsi->bsi_oc is null going into this call. > > rc = attr_merge_normalize_one( bsi->bsi_e, > slap_schema.si_ad_objectClass, > &bsi->bsi_oc->bom_oc->soc_cname, > bsi->bsi_op->o_tmpmemctx ); > > Without any time to absorb any implications, adding this just before the > above > call > > // added without any clue... Rex > if ( eid->eid_oc == NULL ) > return LDAP_NO_SUCH_OBJECT; > > fixes the SEGV, but not my interface. This should not happen, since that objectClass mapping is explicitly obtained few lines above if missing, and if the entry's OC was known by ID it must be available in the ID to OC mapping. I suspect something like ITS#6617, where the obejctClass' ID overflows the unsigned long. Can you investigate? A backtrace and a description of the expected and actual values would help (e.g. what ID has the "offending" objectClass, and what ID is backsql_id2entry() actually trying to fetch). It should be OK, at this point, to give up, but a clear indication that mapping did not succeed needs to be returned. p.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6617) back-sql: 64-bit parent IDs get munged
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 07 Aug '10

07 Aug '10

> 64-bit values for (at least) parent IDs do not get resolved correctly - > only the > lower 32 bits are preserved. This leads up to a crash as it tries to > resolve a > non-existant ID: > > To reproduce: > ldap_entries has a row with an ID of 1,000,000,000 with a parent of > 9,999,999,999 (and > a row 9,999,999,999 for the parent). When back-sql goes to resolve this, the > following shows in the ODBC trace: > > SELECT COUNT(*) FROM > ldap_entry_objclasses,ldap_entries,ldap_static_entries > WHERE ldap_static_entries.id=1410065407 AND > ldap_entries.id=ldap_entry_objclasses.entry_id AND > ldap_entries.keyval=ldap_static_entries.id and ldap_entries.oc_map_id=4 > > (1,410,065,407 = 32-bit rollover of 9,999,999,999). Currently, IDs are hardcoded as 32-bit unsigned (unsigned long) for internal use. In back-sql, we used the same type. I wonder whether it makes sense to allow to customize them (I think using 64-bit regardless of the arch is not a choice). p.

1 0

(ITS#6617) back-sql: 64-bit parent IDs get munged
by 7003＠blargh.com 06 Aug '10

06 Aug '10

Full_Name: Andrew Gray Version: 2.4.23 OS: Debian 5 64-bit URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (131.216.14.1) 64-bit values for (at least) parent IDs do not get resolved correctly - only the lower 32 bits are preserved. This leads up to a crash as it tries to resolve a non-existant ID: To reproduce: ldap_entries has a row with an ID of 1000000000 with a parent of 9999999999 (and a row 9999999999 for the parent). When back-sql goes to resolve this, the following shows in the ODBC trace: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ldap_entry_objclasses,ldap_entries,ldap_static_entries WHERE ldap_static_entries.id=1410065407 AND ldap_entries.id=ldap_entry_objclasses.entry_id AND ldap_entries.keyval=ldap_static_entries.id and ldap_entries.oc_map_id=4 (1410065407 = 32-bit rollover of 9999999999).

1 0

(ITS#6616) back-sql crashing
by rex.johnston＠gmail.com 06 Aug '10

06 Aug '10

Full_Name: Rex Johnston Version: cvs OS: debian URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (123.255.40.107) Attempting to create an inetOrgPerson interface to a proprietary database schema. Obviously something wrong at this stage, causes slapd to SEGV. gdb tells me that in servers/slapd/back-sql/entry-id.c:backsql_id2entry() bsi->bsi_oc is null going into this call. rc = attr_merge_normalize_one( bsi->bsi_e, slap_schema.si_ad_objectClass, &bsi->bsi_oc->bom_oc->soc_cname, bsi->bsi_op->o_tmpmemctx ); Without any time to absorb any implications, adding this just before the above call // added without any clue... Rex if ( eid->eid_oc == NULL ) return LDAP_NO_SUCH_OBJECT; fixes the SEGV, but not my interface.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6615) objectClass definition and error 65
by quanah＠zimbra.com 04 Aug '10

04 Aug '10

--On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 10:43 PM +0000 philippe.eychart(a)mail.pf wrote: > Full_Name: Philippe EYCHART > Version: 2.4.21 > OS: Ubuntu 9.10 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (123.50.86.106) This is a question better suited to openldap-technical(a)openldap.org, but inheritance works by having included the previous parent. I.e., person <- organizationalPerson <- inetOrgPerson, as in, inetOrgPerson inherits from organizationalPerson, which inherits from person. person <- organizationalPerson and person <- referencePerson are different inheritance trees. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

Re: (ITS#6614) Checking Pre-Requisities
by quanah＠zimbra.com 04 Aug '10

04 Aug '10

--On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 9:06 PM +0000 tcssuneelkumar(a)gmail.com wrote: > Full_Name: Suneel > Version: 2.4.23 > OS: Linux > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (198.95.226.224) The ITS system is for reporting bugs. For help with building the software, etc, use the openldap-technical(a)openldap.org mailing list. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

(ITS#6615) objectClass definition and error 65
by philippe.eychart＠mail.pf 03 Aug '10

03 Aug '10

Full_Name: Philippe EYCHART Version: 2.4.21 OS: Ubuntu 9.10 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (123.50.86.106) Hi, Two structural (top) classes are not allowed in the same entry. (a person is not a posixGroup ...) Multiple inheritance is not allowed. (although "oc_sup_oids" is a "char **" in the structure "LDAPObjectClass" ... 8-| ) But, why "organisationalPerson" and "residentialPerson" are they not allowed (error returned: 65) in the same entry of type "person"? Yet, they both inherit from the same objectClass "person"?!... (And these two concepts are not incompatible...) Is this fact a misinterpretation of the "simple inheritance" or this return is correct?... (On the other hand, it's true that "person" and "posixGroup" inherit both from the same -abstract- objectClass : "top" ...) None of my research does the answer (Is this a bugg in the server or must I implement it like that?), so I turn to you ... Regards. PE <http://home.gna.org/ldapcppei/Frontends/Howto-7.fr.html#ss7.2>

1 0

(ITS#6614) Checking Pre-Requisities
by tcssuneelkumar＠gmail.com 03 Aug '10

03 Aug '10

Full_Name: Suneel Version: 2.4.23 OS: Linux URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (198.95.226.224) Hi, I am not a experienced unix admin, but i need to setup OpenLdap 2.4.23 on RedHat Linux environments. As per the Admin guide, There are pre-requisites before we install the openldap. Could you please help me to identify if i have the required pre-install libraries / packages. 1. 4.2.1. Transport Layer Security: [root@tmp]# rpm -q openssl openssl-0.9.8e-12.el5_4.6 2. 4.2.2. Simple Authentication and Security Layer [root@tmp]# rpm -qa | grep -i cyr xorg-x11-drv-cyrix-1.1.0-4 cyrus-sasl-devel-2.1.22-5.el5_4.3 cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.22-5.el5_4.3 cyrus-sasl-plain-2.1.22-5.el5_4.3 cyrus-sasl-2.1.22-5.el5_4.3 3. Kerberos Authentication Service [root@astro tmp]# rpm -qa | grep krb krb5-devel-1.6.1-36.el5_4.1 krb5-auth-dialog-0.7-1 krb5-libs-1.6.1-36.el5_4.1 pam_krb5-2.2.14-15 krb5-workstation-1.6.1-36.el5_4.1 4. Database Software I have downloaded the latest Oracle Berkley DB (5.0.26) and set it up as per the Berkley install guide. IS this good enough to continue with OpenLdap installation ? Are the 2nd and 3rd pre-requisites are good enough to continue ? Could you also please let me know how to check if the specified pre-requisite is already existing in the server or not. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs August 2010