openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
21001 discussions

Re: (ITS#9035) LDMB: 0.9.23: mdb_env_set_maxreaders() not honoured?
by hyc＠symas.com 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

steffen(a)sdaoden.eu wrote: > Full_Name: Steffen Nurpmeso > Version: 0.9.23 > OS: Linux > URL: https://ftp.sdaoden.eu/lmdb-bogo.tar.xz > Submission from: (NULL) (109.40.130.211) > > > A follow-up to private communication with Quanah Gibson-Mount. > You can find more in the tarball linked below The maxreaders setting doesn't persist after all processes have closed the environment. Therefore it returns to its default value when the next process opens the environment. The code works as designed. There is no bug here. Closing this ITS. -- -- 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#9036) LDMB: 0.9.23: mdb_env_info() does not report latest mapsize() after transaction abort
by steffen＠sdaoden.eu 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

Full_Name: Steffen Nurpmeso Version: 0.9.23 OS: Linux URL: https://ftp.sdaoden.eu/lmdb-bogo.tar.xz Submission from: (NULL) (109.40.130.211) A follow-up to private communication with Quanah Gibson-Mount. You can find more in the tarball linked below

1 0

(ITS#9035) LDMB: 0.9.23: mdb_env_set_maxreaders() not honoured?
by steffen＠sdaoden.eu 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

1 0

(ITS#9034) LDMB: 0.9.22/3: initial mdb_env_set_mapsize() is problematic
by steffen＠sdaoden.eu 14 Jun '19

14 Jun '19

1 0

Re: (ITS#9033) Computer Object
by quanah＠symas.com 13 Jun '19

13 Jun '19

--On Thursday, June 13, 2019 12:43 PM +0000 jgbuenaventura(a)gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to add a computer/network device (windows, linux, routers) in > Openldap, but i cannot find a specific, schema/objectclass/attribute for > that. Any advice? Hello, The ITS system is for reporting bugs, not asking usage questions. Please use the openldap-technical(a)openldap.org mailing lists for questions such as those above (<https://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/listinfo/openldap-technical>). --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

(ITS#9033) Computer Object
by jgbuenaventura＠gmail.com 13 Jun '19

13 Jun '19

Full_Name: JP Buenaventura Version: 2.4.45 OS: Rhel 6 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (222.127.115.105) Hi, I am trying to add a computer/network device (windows, linux, routers) in Openldap, but i cannot find a specific, schema/objectclass/attribute for that. Any advice? Thanks! JP

1 0

Re: (ITS#9032) need to create custom attributes in openldap schema
by ryan＠nardis.ca 09 Jun '19

09 Jun '19

Hello Suresh, The ITS is for reporting bugs, not for usage questions. For support, please write to the openldap-technical(a)openldap.org mailing list. See https://www.openldap.org/support/ for more details. This ITS will be closed. Thank you, Ryan.

1 0

(ITS#9032) need to create custom attributes in openldap schema
by sureshd＠nihontechnology.com 08 Jun '19

08 Jun '19

Full_Name: Suresh Dhayalan Version: 1.2.2 OS: ubuntu 18.6 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (164.164.10.1) Dear sir, I need to create custom schema attributes, in my AWS cloud I am using ubuntu 18.6. I will create additional attributes to my project related apart from in build attributes, so kindly send me the steps to create my custom attributes. Regards, D Suresh

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by hyc＠symas.com 08 Jun '19

08 Jun '19

Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 3:47 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >> >> Jeffrey Walton wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 2:37 PM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Jeffrey Walton wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 10:08 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeffrey Walton wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:59 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an >>>>>>>>>>> important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many >>>>>>>>>>> tangential problems. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary >>>>>>>>>> part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing >>>>>>>>>> machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't believe this is correct. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe you are thinking of implementation defined behavior? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That would apply to how a particular compiler implementation treats some piece of code. >>>>>>>> Whether a CPU supports unaligned access is machine-defined. Since our code is already >>>>>>>> properly ifdef'd for the machines which do or don't support it, the fact that this is >>>>>>>> "non-portable" is not an issue. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The undefined behavior is causing OpenLDAP to fail testing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Worse, it is causing test failures in programs and libraries which use >>>>>>> OpenLDAP. The OpenLDAP bugs have cross-pollinated into other programs >>>>>>> and libraries. It is not simply contained or limited to OpenLDAP. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's a big problem for testing a QA folks. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then the tests are broken, because these are not bugs. >>>>> >>>>> They are absolutely OpenLDAP bugs. The unaligned accesses are >>>>> Undefined Behavior. >>>> >>>> Simply because the C standard doesn't specify what the behavior is doesn't make it a bug. >>> >>> The C standard does specify the behavior. It falls clearly in >>> Undefined Behavior. >> >> The fact a behavior is undefined does not make it illegal. > > A program with undefined behavior is, by definition, and illegal program. This is pure nonsense. You realize, don't you, that the C spec has no definition of threads? All multithreaded programs are using undefined behavior. And yet here we are, using threads for over 2 decades. The gcc/clang folks have their heads up their asses. They've deliberately misinterpreted the spec claiming undefined behaviors are forbidden, supposedly to enable essential optimizations. Most of which only apply to obscure corner cases in compiler benchmark suites, that nobody in the real world ever benefits from. -- -- 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#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by noloader＠gmail.com 08 Jun '19

08 Jun '19

On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 3:47 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > > Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 2:37 PM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > >> > >> Jeffrey Walton wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 10:08 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Jeffrey Walton wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:59 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>> I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an > >>>>>>>>> important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many > >>>>>>>>> tangential problems. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary > >>>>>>>> part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing > >>>>>>>> machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't believe this is correct. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Maybe you are thinking of implementation defined behavior? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That would apply to how a particular compiler implementation treats some piece of code. > >>>>>> Whether a CPU supports unaligned access is machine-defined. Since our code is already > >>>>>> properly ifdef'd for the machines which do or don't support it, the fact that this is > >>>>>> "non-portable" is not an issue. > >>>>> > >>>>> The undefined behavior is causing OpenLDAP to fail testing. > >>>>> > >>>>> Worse, it is causing test failures in programs and libraries which use > >>>>> OpenLDAP. The OpenLDAP bugs have cross-pollinated into other programs > >>>>> and libraries. It is not simply contained or limited to OpenLDAP. > >>>>> > >>>>> That's a big problem for testing a QA folks. > >>>> > >>>> Then the tests are broken, because these are not bugs. > >>> > >>> They are absolutely OpenLDAP bugs. The unaligned accesses are > >>> Undefined Behavior. > >> > >> Simply because the C standard doesn't specify what the behavior is doesn't make it a bug. > > > > The C standard does specify the behavior. It falls clearly in > > Undefined Behavior. > > The fact a behavior is undefined does not make it illegal. A program with undefined behavior is, by definition, and illegal program. > > And Appendix J.2, Undefined Behavior, says: > > > > Conversion between two pointer types produces a result > > that is incorrectly aligned (6.3.2.3). > > > > You are violating the C standard in macros like COPY_PGNO. Effectively > > you are casting a uint8_t array to an uint16_t*. You cannot do that > > because uint16_t* increases the alignment requirements. > > All internal fields of LMDB are (at least) 2-byte aligned, so these copies always > meet alignment requirements. No, they are not. Some of them are 1-byte aligned. UBsan tells you that. Others require 4-byte alignment. UBsan tells you that, too. Jeff

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