openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20960 discussions

Re: (ITS#6235) Installing openLDAP on Solaris 10 (Berkeley DB issue)
by mkassawara＠gmail.com 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

The configure script can't find the BDB headers/libraries in the typical places. Either install them to a typical place seen by the preprocessor/linker (e.g., /usr/include, /usr/lib, /usr/local/ include, /usr/local/lib ...) or set the CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS environment variables appropriately before running the configure script. If you plan to install OpenLDAP to a custom location, consider using "crle" to add the necessary library path(s) to the runtime linking environment. Also, to prevent another issue down the road, make sure you apply the Oracle patches to BDB 4.7.25 before building it. This is not an ITS... you should use openldap-technical for future correspondence on this issue. On Jul 29, 2009, at 3:09 PM, mark.liu(a)nyu.edu wrote: > Full_Name: Mark Liu > Version: 2.4.16 > OS: Sun Solaris 10 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (128.122.149.115) > > > I am trying to install openLDAP on Solaris 10. Whenever I tried to > configure > openLDAP, it would give the following message: > > checking db.h usability... no > checking db.h presence... no > checking for db.h... no > configure: error: BDB/HDB: BerkeleyDB not available > > The install would stop there. I thought it might be require a > different version > of BerkeleyDB, I downloaded both BerkeleyDB 4.7.25 and 4.6.21. > OpenLDAP > produced the same result for both instances of BerkeleyDB. > > What do i need to do to get pass this? Thanks! >

1 0

(ITS#6235) Installing openLDAP on Solaris 10 (Berkeley DB issue)
by mark.liu＠nyu.edu 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

Full_Name: Mark Liu Version: 2.4.16 OS: Sun Solaris 10 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (128.122.149.115) I am trying to install openLDAP on Solaris 10. Whenever I tried to configure openLDAP, it would give the following message: checking db.h usability... no checking db.h presence... no checking for db.h... no configure: error: BDB/HDB: BerkeleyDB not available The install would stop there. I thought it might be require a different version of BerkeleyDB, I downloaded both BerkeleyDB 4.7.25 and 4.6.21. OpenLDAP produced the same result for both instances of BerkeleyDB. What do i need to do to get pass this? Thanks!

1 0

Re: (ITS#6225) GSSAPI support for client library (fixes)
by mikbec＠web.de 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

hyc(a)symas.com wrote: > mimir(a)samba.org wrote: >> Full_Name: Rafal Szczesniak >> Version: Stable (2.4.16) >> OS: GNU/Linux >> URL: http://www.samba.org/~mimir/gssapi-bugfix.diff >> Submission from: (NULL) (67.51.54.234) >> >> >> This is a bugfix patch for OpenLDAP's gssapi support. >> > One of these patches appears to duplicate ITS#6092. As the original author of > this code, could you also take a look at #6091 and #6093? > Yes, I think this patch tries to resolve the same problem like #6093 but with a different approach. And after some discussion with Hallvard B Furuseth about the guess_service_principal() string problem (#6223) I have sent a all-in-one-patch which results in #6110. best regards mike

1 0

Re: (ITS#6215) liblber problems
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

Fixing this, and some other problems: - decode.c incorrectly treats length octet 0x80 (indefinite-length) as long length = 0. Fixing to returning an error. - Overly complex and inefficient code, in particular encode.c. Rewriting. Removing struct seqorset and related allocations. - Missing overflow/max-size checks. - ber_scanf() *must* clean up properly on error, as the code notes. Currently it can crash when reading malformed elements. Both encode.c and decode.c mostly access the Ber data "properly" via ber_write()/ber_read() but sometimes accesses the buffer directly. Can clean up and speed up at the same time by collecting that in fewer places. Side effects: - Dropping ber_write(,,,nonzero) support. Any callers likey need to use BerElement.ber_sos_ptr/ber_sos_inner, the struct seqorset replacement. - Dropping ber_log_sos_dump() and ber_sos_dump(), leaving behind stubs. They'd need a new ber parameter to work. Other matters - questions: - decode.c is quite lax about what it accepts. Should we tighten that when feasible, or remain "liberal in what we accept"? E.g. it accepts BER INTEGER length 0 and BOOLEAN length != 1, and wrong CONSTRUCTED/PRIMITIVE encoding bit. - encode.c willingly stores broken identifier octets if passed an invalid tag, e.g. a single octet with low bits 0x1F implying long tag format. I'm inclined to leave that alone, caller's responsibility. -- Hallvard

1 0

Re: (ITS#6232) OpenLDAP 2.4.17 fails to compile with --with-tls=gnutls
by steffen＠hauihau.de 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

Dear Howard, please have a look at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233633 . The provided patch in the Debian bug tracker does not fix the compiling issue of passwd.c as the defines and typedefs are inserted *after* the first occurrence of "des_key". I've modified this patch, and it's already included in gentoo's ebuild for OpenLDAP 2.4.17. I don't know if I'm authorized to contribute it to the ITS, as I've only modified the original patch. I would do it of course, if 'm allowed to, since there is no employer, who would prevent me to do it, as I'm doing it in my freetime.

1 0

(ITS#6234) CONFIGURABLE TCP BUFFERS IN SLAPD FEATURE REQUEST
by evaristojosec＠yahoo.es 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

Full_Name: Evaristo Camarero Version: 2.4.x OS: Linux URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (194.237.142.20) Hi, Working with slapd under heavy load it could be interesting to have TCP buffers size configurable at slapd application level instead of getting default OS values. Some fast modifications in daemon.c file to achieve a hardcoded value for the sender buffer are: int buf_size = 1572864; /* 1.5 Mb */ rc =setsockopt ( s, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, (int*)&buf_size, sizeof(buf_size)); if(rc==-1) { Debug( LDAP_DEBUG_ANY, "slapd(%ld): " "setsockopt(SO_SNDBUF) failed errno=%d (%s)\n", (long) l.sl_sd, err, sock_errstr(err) ); } else { Debug( LDAP_DEBUG_ANY, "slapd(%ld): setsockopt(SO_SNDBUF) to %d\n", (long) l.sl_sd, buf_size, 0); } Regards, Evaristo

1 0

Re: (ITS#5942) URI matching of "self" in add_syncrepl is incomplete
by hyc＠symas.com 29 Jul '09

29 Jul '09

jclarke(a)linagora.com wrote: > On 14.02.2009 01:51, Howard Chu wrote: >> Jonathan Clarke wrote: >>> On 13.02.2009 01:23, Howard Chu wrote: >>>> There are valid reasons to point a syncrepl consumer at the same slapd >>>> (e.g., proxy syncrepl, automatic local backup/mirroring, rewriting a >>>> subtree of a main database, etc.). Using the exhaustive matching that >>>> serverID uses would preclude those cases from working. >>> I see. I understand you don't want to break existing functionality. >>> However, I still feel this is a bug, or at least that you need to "hack" >>> the setup to get things working as expected. >> >> The docs state that "syncrepl provider" is the LDAP URI of the master >> server. If you're not putting in the same URI as the master is using, >> that's a config error, not a bug. > > Understood. Nothing is broken, and we have worked around this issue > using explicit listeners to slapd -h. > > This behaviour did surprise me, considering the behaviour of serverID > matching. May I suggest that a note of warning is included in the admin > guide? For example: > http://milopita.phillipoux.net/jonathan-clarke-20090216.patch > >>> Would I be right in assuming that in all the "valid reasons to point a >>> syncrepl consumer at the same slapd" you mention, the syncrepl consumer >>> uses a different base DN than the base DN of the database that the >>> syncrepl consumer is configured on? If so, maybe the exhaustive matching >>> that serverID uses could be used, if and only if those two base DNs are >>> different? Actually, the exhaustive matching is only needed if the two base DNs are the same. This is now patched in HEAD, please test. >> That sounds reasonable. Will think about it a bit more. Certainly if the >> two base DNs are the same, it will cause a loop... > > Indeed. For what it's worth, while testing on cn=config, I noticed this > having various consequences including: > 1) cn=config becoming read-only (shadow) and updates returning a referral. > 2) in a MMR setup, some updates not being replicated to all N servers. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, 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#6233) print_deref assertion if no deref attributes returned
by hyc＠symas.com 28 Jul '09

28 Jul '09

rmeggins(a)redhat.com wrote: > Full_Name: Rich Megginson > Version: 2.4.17+ (current HEAD) > OS: Fedora > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (76.113.59.19) > > > I am testing the LDAP Dereference feature specified here - > http://www.openldap.org/devel/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/doc/drafts/draft-masara… > > I am getting an assertion in common.c at line 2077: > 2074: ptr = lutil_strncopy( ptr, dr->derefVal.bv_val, dr->derefVal.bv_len ); > 2075: *ptr++ = '\n'; > 2076: *ptr++ = '\0'; > 2077: assert( ptr<= buf + len ); > > tool_write_ldif( LDIF_PUT_COMMENT, NULL, buf, ptr - buf); > > In my test, ptr is one greater than buf + len. It appears that len does not > take into consideration the addition of the trailing \0 at line 2076. My test > is looking for a dereference attribute which does not have any values, so that > the attrVals in the control response is empty. If there are values to return in > attrVals, the assertion is not triggered. > Ah the ever-popular off-by-one. Should be OK now in HEAD, thanks for the report. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, 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#6232) OpenLDAP 2.4.17 fails to compile with --with-tls=gnutls
by hyc＠symas.com 28 Jul '09

28 Jul '09

steffen.hau(a)rz.uni-mannheim.de wrote: > Full_Name: Steffen Hau > Version: 2.4.17 > OS: gentoo > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (134.155.35.13) > > > Gentoo prefers gnutls usage over openssl when compiling openldap. But if > with-tls=gnutls and enable-lmpasswd set, neither HAVE_OPENSSL nor NAVE_MOZNSS is > defined and passwd.c failes to compile with: See ITS #4997. There is a patch for this in the debian bug tracker, but until someone with appropriate authorization (i.e., the patch author) contributes it to the ITS with the requisite Rights statements attached, we cannot incorporate it. > passwd.c:813: error: expected declaration specifiers or ... before des_key > passwd.c: In function lmPasswd_to_key: > passwd.c:828: error: key undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:828: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > passwd.c:828: error: for each function it appears in.) > passwd.c: In function chk_lanman: > passwd.c:839: error: des_key undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:839: error: expected ; before key > passwd.c:840: error: des_context undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:840: error: expected ; before schedule > passwd.c:841: error: des_data_block undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:841: error: expected ; before StdText > passwd.c:842: error: expected ; before PasswordHash1 > passwd.c:859: error: key undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:859: error: too many arguments to function lmPasswd_to_key > passwd.c:860: error: schedule undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:861: error: StdText undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:861: error: PasswordHash1 undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:861: error: DES_ENCRYPT undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:867: error: too many arguments to function lmPasswd_to_key > passwd.c:869: error: PasswordHash2 undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c: In function hash_lanman: > passwd.c:1135: error: des_key undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1135: error: expected ; before key > passwd.c:1136: error: des_context undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1136: error: expected ; before schedule > passwd.c:1137: error: des_data_block undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1137: error: expected ; before StdText > passwd.c:1138: error: expected ; before PasswordHash1 > passwd.c:1155: error: key undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1155: error: too many arguments to function lmPasswd_to_key > passwd.c:1156: error: schedule undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1157: error: StdText undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1157: error: PasswordHash1 undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1157: error: DES_ENCRYPT undeclared (first use in this function) > passwd.c:1159: error: too many arguments to function lmPasswd_to_key > passwd.c:1161: error: PasswordHash2 undeclared (first use in this function) > make[2]: *** [passwd.o] Error 1 > > I took a look in the passwd.c file, and because of neither HAVE_OPENSSL nor > HAVE_MOZNSS is defined, des_key isn't defined also. There is already a check in > the configure script, if tls is set when lmpasswd is set. The failure message > for it explains, that there has to be openssl installed in order to use lm > passwords. Perhaps this test has to be changed in a manner that it's checked, > what implementation is used for tls, and only activates lm passwords only, if > tls is either openssl or moznss. > > Please let me know if you need further information. > > Best regards, > Steffen Hau > -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

(ITS#6233) print_deref assertion if no deref attributes returned
by rmeggins＠redhat.com 28 Jul '09

28 Jul '09

Full_Name: Rich Megginson Version: 2.4.17+ (current HEAD) OS: Fedora URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (76.113.59.19) I am testing the LDAP Dereference feature specified here - http://www.openldap.org/devel/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/doc/drafts/draft-masara… I am getting an assertion in common.c at line 2077: 2074: ptr = lutil_strncopy( ptr, dr->derefVal.bv_val, dr->derefVal.bv_len ); 2075: *ptr++ = '\n'; 2076: *ptr++ = '\0'; 2077: assert( ptr <= buf + len ); tool_write_ldif( LDIF_PUT_COMMENT, NULL, buf, ptr - buf); In my test, ptr is one greater than buf + len. It appears that len does not take into consideration the addition of the trailing \0 at line 2076. My test is looking for a dereference attribute which does not have any values, so that the attrVals in the control response is empty. If there are values to return in attrVals, the assertion is not triggered.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs