https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9642
Issue ID: 9642
Summary: Adding a task to runqueue doesn't wake the main thread
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
If a connection adds a new syncrepl stanza, that is not started until the main
thread comes around to doing it. However if that thread is currently stuck in
SLAP_EVENT_WAIT() and nothing else happens (like an unbind over the connection
that modified the config), the task is never started. This can take a long
time.
No idea yet how to wake it up with/from ldap_pvt_runqueue_insert() given that
sits within libldap and not really something that should be calling
slap_wake_listener().
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9577
Issue ID: 9577
Summary: slapd -V should be deprecated
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: smckinney(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
Sometimes a user's (present one included) ignorance gets them in trouble
unnecessarily. The -V option is an example...
Normally, when one wants to determine the version of a process, they use -V, or
perhaps -v. With slapd, the daemon actually continues to run, which can have
negative consequences.
The doc clearly states that -VV is probably what the user wants, but is
counter-intutive. Who RTFM's before checking the version?
-V print version info (-VV exit afterwards, -VVV print
info about static overlays and backends)
I propose we eliminate the option to allow slapd to continue running after
displaying the version. Perhaps we eliminate the -V option entirely, or just
make it work the same as -VV.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9367
Issue ID: 9367
Summary: back-mdb: encryption support
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Need to add encryption support to the back-mdb backend, depends on issue#9364
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9493
Issue ID: 9493
Summary: slapo-accesslog handling of deletion of multi-valued
configuration attributes removes wrong value from list
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.57
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: svella(a)technologist.com
Target Milestone: ---
I observed this in the debugger while working on a small feature addition to
slapo-accesslog.
log_cf_gen(), when handling the initial configuration of oldAccessLogOldAttr
(accesslog.c:989), linked list li_oldattrs is being built by inserting each
value in order at the head of the list, resulting in the list being in reverse
order. But when handling LDAP_MOD_DELETE of same attribute (accesslog.c:989),
it is using the index of the removed value (valx) to find and removed the entry
in the linked list, but it's counting from the head of li_oldattrs and not the
tail, resulting in the wrong item being removed from the list unless counting
from the head or the tail happens find the same item.
(Line numbers refer to commit 6c469f07935e351e349bf38fc223dab704c51a76)
Handling of oldAccessLogBase appears to have the same problem, and a cursory
glance through the source of other overlays reveals a similar pattern, and I'm
guessing the same problem.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9556
Issue ID: 9556
Summary: slapd-config should return invalidAttributeSyntax if
parsing schema description fails
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.4
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: michael(a)stroeder.com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm currently testing error handling and interacting with LDAP clients (e.g. my
web2ldap).
Sending an invalid attribute type description results in an error (as expected)
returned by slapd-config:
RESULT tag=103 err=80 qtime=0.000032 etime=0.001271 text=olcAttributeTypes:
Unexpected token before SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
But result code other(80) seems not very useful. It's too unspecific to decide
on specific error handling.
It would be much more useful if slapd-config returns invalidAttributeSyntax(21)
in this case.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9640
Issue ID: 9640
Summary: ACL privilege for MOD_INCREMENT
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: michael(a)stroeder.com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm using LDAP write operations with MOD_INCREMENT with pre-read-control for
uidNumber/gidNumber generation.
I'd like to limit write access to an Integer attribute "nextID" to
MOD_INCREMENT, ideally even restricting the de-/increment value.
(Uniqueness is achieved with slapo-unique anyway but still I'd like to avoid
users messing with this attribute).
IMHO the ideal solution would be a new privilege "i".
Example for limiting write access to increment by one and grant read access for
using read control:
access to
attrs=nextID
val=1
by group=... =ri
Example for decrementing by two without read:
access to
attrs=nextID
val=-2
by group=... =i
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9388
Issue ID: 9388
Summary: mdb_stat for DupSort DBI shows incorrect data
Product: LMDB
Version: 0.9.26
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: AskAlexSharov(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
It doesn't include pages pages used for values.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9223
Bug ID: 9223
Summary: Add support for incremental backup
Product: LMDB
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
For LMDB 1.0, add support for incremental backups
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9619
Issue ID: 9619
Summary: mdb_env_copy2 with MDB_CP_COMPACT in mdb.master3
produces corrupt mdb file
Product: LMDB
Version: 0.9.29
Hardware: All
OS: Windows
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: kriszyp(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
When copying an LMDB database with mdb_env_copy2 with the MDB_CP_COMPACT with
mdb.master3, the resulting mdb file seems to be corrupt and when using it in
LMDB, I get segmentation faults. Copying without the compacting flag seems to
work fine. I apologize, I know this is not a very good issue report, as I
haven't had a chance to actually narrow this down to a more
reproducible/isolated case, or look for how to patch. I thought I would report
in case there are any ideas on what could cause this. The segmentation faults
always seem to be memory write faults (as opposed to try fault on trying to
read). Or perhaps the current backup/copying functionality is eventually going
to be replaced by incremental backup/copying anyway
(https://twitter.com/hyc_symas/status/1315651814096875520). I'll try to update
this if I get a chance to investigate more, but otherwise feel free to
ignore/consider low-priority since the work around is easy.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.