https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8618
--- Comment #27 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
(In reply to Quanah Gibson-Mount from comment #26)
> Additionally, this was clearly documented in the UPGRADE section of the Admin guide.
Specifically, in the OpenLDAP 2.5 admin guide section on upgrading from
OpenLDAP 2.4 or prior releases.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8618
--- Comment #26 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
(In reply to jel+git from comment #23)
> 1) If one decides to drop an option, it should be
> a) communicated clearly.
> b) documented and alternatives shown
Hello,
The options were *clearly* marked as deprecated for the last 24 years in the
man pages for the ldap client utilities. It appears whomever wrote the scripts
in question chose to ignore this clearly documented deprecation of the options
and used them anyway. Additionally, this was clearly documented in the UPGRADE
section of the Admin guide.
In other words, this change has been clearly communicated for years, and well
documented. Perhaps in the future it would be wise to read the supplied
upgrade documentation prior to performing an upgrade of software and to pay
attention to deprecation notices in the software documentation instead of
attacking a volunteer powered open source software project.
Regards,
Quanah
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10159
Issue ID: 10159
Summary: Unable to Use ldapi:// - ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s:
Can't contact LDAP server (-1)
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.13
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: chilimili1(a)outlook.de
Target Milestone: ---
Problem:
When attempting to use the ldapi:// URI to interact with the OpenLDAP server
using commands like ldapmodify or ldapsearch, an error is encountered:
ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Can't contact LDAP server (-1).
Process is running
# ps -aux |grep ldap
ldap 9 0.0 0.4 42232968 79472 ? Sl Jan23 0:10
/usr/libexec/slapd -u ldap -h ldap:/// ldapi:/// ldaps:/// -F
/etc/openldap/slapd.d -d 256
Troubleshooting Steps Taken:
Verified the ldapi URI configuration.
Inspected the OpenLDAP configuration using slapd.conf or cn=config.
Examined ACLs and access control rules.
Additional Information:
OpenLDAP is running as a Docker container
Docker Compose configuration includes port mappings for LDAP (3269:389) and
LDAPS (3268:636).
The whole configuration was migrated from a working Server
Any additional insights or recommendations for resolving the ldapi connection
issue would be greatly appreciated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8618
--- Comment #25 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> ---
Also: the time to raise objections to a change is before the release. The 2.5
call for testing went out in April 2021.
https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/…
You're about 3 years late complaining about the removal of a feature deprecated
24 years ago. Demanding that volunteers work on what you want the way you want
won't fly. Only people who are actively involved will have their concerns
listened to.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8618
--- Comment #24 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> ---
A reminder that the OpenLDAP Project is worked solely by volunteers.
Symas does not direct the operation of the Project. They merely provide support
for what the Project releases. Your criticism of Symas is wholly out of place.
Meanwhile, criticizing work that was given to you for free, without you ever
lifting a finger to contribute, just makes you a selfish, entitled, ungrateful
ass. If you think you can run things better, then actively contribute. That is
the only way that open source projects advance.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8618
--- Comment #23 from jel+git(a)linofee.org ---
Just upgraded a server from Ubuntu 20.04 to 22.04, which contains 2.5.x and
found out, that the options -p and -h got dropped - and requires me to adjust
quite a bit of scripts because of this non-sense.
This is such a poor software management and versioning, hard to believe, that
anyone who allowed it to go through, has any experience in enterprise ready
software.
1) If one decides to drop an option, it should be
a) communicated clearly.
b) documented and alternatives shown
2) If a software gets released, which has an incompatible change wrt. previous
major.minor.tiny version, it should rise the major number of the software
version, so that OS/Distro vendors are warned and may decide to stick with the
old version.
There are several options to allow -H and -h,-p side by side - openldap has
chosen the worst option. This might be a hint, how poor its maintenance
actually is/how bad the support by sysmas probably is. This is also a good
example, that for OS/Distro vendors it is sometimes a really good thing to
stick with the older version instead of switching to the "latest" stuff.
Anyway, thanx for the work. =8-(
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10158
Issue ID: 10158
Summary: Linker error when building openldap-2.4.59
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.59
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: umagmrit(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10013
Issue ID: 10013
Summary: Some code (ppolicy, etc.) ignores
REP_CTRLS_MUSTBEFREED when touching rs->sr_ctrls
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Certain parts of the source indicate that rs->sr_ctrls shouldn't be
realloc'd/free'd unless REP_CTRLS_MUSTBEFREED is set, but then other parts of
slapd (slap_ctrl_whatFailed_add, glue_op_search?, ...) and overlays (ppolicy,
syncprov, ...) will blindly overwrite and/or realloc it.
slap_add_control() (an analog of slap_add_controls()) might be useful for this,
possibly alongside some way to free the other data kept around to streamline
the code other users need for correct operation.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9944
Issue ID: 9944
Summary: Reverting an olcDbACLBind statement breaks proxied
write operations
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.3
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
On a system with olcDbIDAssertBind configured, and proxied authorizations
working correctly, an olcDbACLBind statement was added to the configuration for
lastbind support. However an incorrect identity was in place for the authzid
in the ACL bind statement which caused proxy authorization to fail. The change
was backed out (There was never any change to the olcDbIDAssertBind config
fragment) and after that, all write operations failed instead of being proxied,
with err=80. Restarting slapd fixed the issue, which indicates an underlying
problem in the cn=config db in reverting to the original working state.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10151
Issue ID: 10151
Summary: Leaks in do_syncrep2() when error handling
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Investigating the persistent CI failures in test050, I can see some memory
leaks that should be tackled (if only to reduce noise). For one, when receiving
an entry without a syncrepl control attached or when dealing with a concurrent
thread removing that consumer, we leak our scratch data (decoded controls,
modlist, ...).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.