openldap-bugs October 2024

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
122 discussions

[Bug 9245] New: devel/programming needs rewrite
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 28 Jan '25

28 Jan '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9245 Bug ID: 9245 Summary: devel/programming needs rewrite Product: website Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: website Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- The information on the devel/programming web page is at least a decade out of date and needs a complete overhaul. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 1

[Issue 10140] New: Add microsecond timestamp format for local file logging
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 17 Jan '25

17 Jan '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10140 Issue ID: 10140 Summary: Add microsecond timestamp format for local file logging Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: gnoe(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- Add microsecond-level timestamps to local file logging. Format is: "YYYY-mm-ddTHH:MM:SS.ffffffZ" The attached patch file is derived from OpenLDAP Software. All of the modifications to OpenLDAP Software represented in the following patch(es) were developed by Gregory Noe gnoe(a)symas.com. I have not assigned rights and/or interest in this work to any party. The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following notice: Copyright 2023 Gregory Noe Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10084] New: Move away from DIGEST-MD5 as a default in the test suite
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Jan '25

14 Jan '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10084 Issue ID: 10084 Summary: Move away from DIGEST-MD5 as a default in the test suite Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: test suite Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- cyrus-sasl seem on the verge or removing the DIGEST-MD5 mechanism from 2.2 onwards. As such we should update our defaults in a couple of our test scripts for master/2.7 at least. Are SCRAM mechanisms the go-to these days? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9739] New: Undefined reference to ber_sockbuf_io_udp in 2.6.0
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Jan '25

13 Jan '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9739 Issue ID: 9739 Summary: Undefined reference to ber_sockbuf_io_udp in 2.6.0 Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: simon.pichugin(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- While I was trying to build OpenLDAP 2.6 on Fedora Rawhide I've got the error message: /usr/bin/ld: ./.libs/libldap.so: undefined reference to `ber_sockbuf_io_udp' I've checked commits from https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9673 and found that 'ber_sockbuf_io_udp' was not added to https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/liblber/… I've asked on the project's mailing list and got a reply: "That symbol only exists if OpenLDAP is built with LDAP_CONNECTIONLESS defined, which is not a supported feature. Feel free to file a bug report at https://bugs.openldap.org/" https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… Hence, creating the bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 11

[Issue 9886] New: At "sync" logging, nothing shows how long a write op took on consumers
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 17 Dec '24

17 Dec '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9886 Issue ID: 9886 Summary: At "sync" logging, nothing shows how long a write op took on consumers Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified 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: --- If sync logging is enabled on a consumer, there's no etime logged which means it is not possible to see how long a write op took on that consumer. This can be useful information to see how the node is performing, particularly if it is a read only node where there will be no general MOD timing logged. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10275] New: mdb_load could use a parameter to pass batch size
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Dec '24

10 Dec '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10275 Issue ID: 10275 Summary: mdb_load could use a parameter to pass batch size Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.21 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: gkwicker(a)amazon.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1037 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1037&action=edit Patch to mdb_load.c in version 0.9.21 mdb_load is very slow when ingesting a large db. The attached patch (0.9.21 but will apply to other versions with modification) allows the user to pass a batch size to be used instead of the default value of 100. Changing the batch size to a larger value improves ingestion speed. I, Gary Wicker, hereby place the following 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. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 22

[Issue 10235] New: Configure without --enable-nestgroup=no enables feature
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Nov '24

26 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10235 Issue ID: 10235 Summary: Configure without --enable-nestgroup=no enables feature Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.8 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: stacey.marshall(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- OpenLDAP 2.6.8 configured with --enable-overlays. Some openldap commands output a Duplicate attributeType notice, for example # /sbin/slapcat -b cn=config -H ldap:///???olcTLSCertificateKeyFile=\* | grep olcTLSCertificateKeyFile register_at: AttributeType "( 1.2.840.113556.1.2.102 NAME 'memberOf' DESC 'Group that the entry belongs to' SYNTAX '1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12' EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch USAGE dSAOperation NO-USER-MODIFICATION X-ORIGIN 'iPlanet Delegated Administrator' )": Duplicate attributeType, 1.2.840.113556.1.2.102 olcTLSCertificateKeyFile: /etc/certs/localhost/host.key Specifying configure option --enable-nestgroup=no prevents nestgroup feature and the message from being displayed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10234] New: syncrepl does not reset the retrynum
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Nov '24

26 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10234 Issue ID: 10234 Summary: syncrepl does not reset the retrynum Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.8 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hamano(a)osstech.co.jp Target Milestone: --- ``` syncrepl retry="5 10 30 +" ``` When replication fails with the above settings, syncrepl retries "10 times at 5 second intervals". Then, the retry count should be reset on the next replication failure. In actual, it does not reset. The behavior is as follows: ``` (first time replication failure) do_syncrepl: rid=001 rc -1 retrying (9 retries left) do_syncrepl: rid=001 rc -1 retrying (8 retries left) (resume replication) (second time replication failure) do_syncrepl: rid=001 rc -1 retrying (7 retries left) do_syncrepl: rid=001 rc -1 retrying (6 retries left) ``` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10263] New: ldapmodify error messages should be more helpful when dealing with trailing whitespace
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Nov '24

26 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10263 Issue ID: 10263 Summary: ldapmodify error messages should be more helpful when dealing with trailing whitespace Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: client tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Often when copy-pasting, a trailing whitespace can sneak in to a modify LDIF (e.g. "delete: attribute \nattribute: ..."), ldapmodify should emit a different message than: "ldapmodify: wrong attributeType at line x" because that is just not helpful. First off, the line number refers to the one that's usually correct. Emitting an "expecting '%s'" would be a start. Maybe we should even warn/error when an attribute name in a change record contains whitespace, because it's not valid as RFC 2849 grammar only allows ALPHA/DIGIT/'-'/'.'/';' anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10249] New: slapo-nestgroup leak with non-nested groups
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Nov '24

26 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10249 Issue ID: 10249 Summary: slapo-nestgroup leak with non-nested groups Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Searching for a member= of a group when no nesting is in place will leak memory. It seems to stem from a few `gi.gi_numDNs` tests that should most likely be against `gi.gi_DNs` instead. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs October 2024