- openldap-bugs - openldap.org

[Issue 7768] Use of olcDbUri in LDAP/Chain configuration for ppolicy_forward_updates
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7768 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|slapd |documentation Target Milestone|2.5.3 |2.5.2 Keywords| |reviewed --- Comment #1 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- If a URI is not configured, it is then "unknown" and will only be chased anonymously. For bind assert to work, the URI must be configured. Documentation may need updating to reflect this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7767] Connection not reset when olcDbUri value changed in cn=config (ldap backend)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7767 --- Comment #1 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Can you provide a test case? Per the code, when the old value is deleted, all open connections are closed and new connections are opened to the updated value. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7649] Feature request: numSubordinates attribute
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7649 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.5.3 |2.6.0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7596] slapo-ppolicy: OpenLDAP returning incorrect value for "graceAuthNsRemaining"
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7596 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.5.3 |2.5.2 Assignee|bugs(a)openldap.org |ondra(a)mistotebe.net -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7343] slapo-dynlist does not include attributes of an entry containing objectClass of the dynlist attrset
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7343 --- Comment #3 from openldap(a)stormcloud9.net <openldap(a)stormcloud9.net> --- I think you might have missed the second half of the issue. ======== Now the documentation clearly states recursion is not allowed, so if cn=child were to have a 'labeledURI', this labeledURI would not be expanded. But this is not what is being done here, cn=child has no labeledURI present. It also behaves perfectly fine if I pull the "objetClass: labeledURIObject" off cn=child. ldapsearch with objectClass labeledURIObject present on cn=child: ---- dn: cn=parent,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: groupOfNames objectClass: top objectClass: labeledURIObject cn: parent member: uid=foo,dc=example,dc=com labeledURI: ldap:///cn=child,dc=example,dc=com??base?(objectClass=*) ---- ldapsearch without objectClass labeledURIObject present on cn=child: ---- dn: cn=parent,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: groupOfNames objectClass: top objectClass: labeledURIObject cn: parent cn: child member: uid=foo,dc=example,dc=com member: uid=bar,dc=example,dc=com labeledURI: ldap:///cn=child,dc=example,dc=com??base?(objectClass=*) ---- -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7353] Handling request controls that include spurious control values
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7353 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.5.3 |--- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7353] Handling request controls that include spurious control values
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7353 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #4 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- ppolicy following the spec, no real complaints for 8 years. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7343] slapo-dynlist does not include attributes of an entry containing objectClass of the dynlist attrset
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7343 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7343] slapo-dynlist does not include attributes of an entry containing objectClass of the dynlist attrset
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7343 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.5.3 |--- Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- As documented recursion is not supported -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7262] slapo-ppolicy overlay cannot use a policy stored in a different backend from the account that it controls
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7262 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.5.3 |2.5.2 Assignee|bugs(a)openldap.org |ondra(a)mistotebe.net --- Comment #3 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Ondrej to examine if this is already fixed with ppolicy10. If it isn't or is not a simple fix, will move out to 2.6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7259] slapo-policy count bytes not characters
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7259 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|overlays |documentation Target Milestone|2.5.3 |2.5.2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 5738] back-monitor: registering a new backend (via moduleload) should add the corresponding entry in cn=monitor
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5738 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs(a)openldap.org |quanah(a)openldap.org --- Comment #3 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Probably works, needs quick validation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 5737] back-monitor: adding a database should add its entry in cn=monitor
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5737 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 5737] back-monitor: adding a database should add its entry in cn=monitor
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

1 0

[Issue 8835] update admin guide to use "openssl rehash" instead of c_rehash
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8835 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • 58caa2f8 by Quanah Gibson-Mount at 2021-02-22T15:59:15+00:00 ITS#8835 - Update to use rehash command from OpenSSL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9476] New: Documentation error for MDB_GET_BOTH_RANGE
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9476 Issue ID: 9476 Summary: Documentation error for MDB_GET_BOTH_RANGE Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.28 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: jaqenn(a)hotmail.com Target Milestone: --- The documentation for MDB_GET_BOTH_RANGE is incorrect. This operation is documented as 'position at key, nearest data'. It appears to me that it should instead say 'position at key, first data greater than or equal to specified data'. If I call mdb_cursor_get with a valid key and a data smaller than all existing values, then lmdb returns MDB_SUCCESS and the cursor is positioned at the first value. If I call mdb_cursor_get with a valid key and a data larger than all existing values, then lmdb returns MDB_NOTFOUND and the cursor is not repositioned. The documentation 'nearest data' makes me expect that if I call mdb_cursor_get with a valid key and a data larger than all existing values, then lmdb would return MDB_SUCCESS and the cursor is positioned at the last value. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 1

[Issue 9332] New: Compilation of 2.4.52 fails: "init.c", line 45: too many initializers for scalar
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Feb '21

22 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9332 Issue ID: 9332 Summary: Compilation of 2.4.52 fails: "init.c", line 45: too many initializers for scalar Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.52 Hardware: All OS: Solaris Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: stacey.marshall(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- The addition of integer ldo_tls_require_san to structure requires an additional initialization digit to macro LDAP_LDO_TLS_NULLARG. --- openldap-2.4.52/libraries/libldap/ldap-int.h 2020-08-28 09:10:00.000000000 -0700 +++ openldap-2.4.52.x/libraries/libldap/ldap-int.h 2020-09-01 10:08:44.661226154 -0700 @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ int ldo_tls_impl; int ldo_tls_crlcheck; int ldo_tls_require_san; -#define LDAP_LDO_TLS_NULLARG ,0,0,0,{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},0,0,0,0 +#define LDAP_LDO_TLS_NULLARG ,0,0,0,{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},0,0,0,0,0 #else #define LDAP_LDO_TLS_NULLARG #endif -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 7

[Issue 9161] Codespell report for "OpenLDAP" (on fossies.org)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Feb '21

19 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9161 --- Comment #19 from jens.schleusener(a)fossies.org <jens.schleusener(a)fossies.org> --- > Feel free to configure it to email me directly for both openldap master and > lmdb master. Done. And congratulations for the now "perfect" status. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9161] Codespell report for "OpenLDAP" (on fossies.org)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9161 --- Comment #18 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- (In reply to jens.schleusener(a)fossies.org from comment #13) > By the way, there exists also the possibility to be informed by email if new > misspellings are detected but that may be a bit annoying ;-) Feel free to configure it to email me directly for both openldap master and lmdb master. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9161] Codespell report for "OpenLDAP" (on fossies.org)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9161 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED --- Comment #17 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • a48d8b48 by Quanah Gibson-Mount at 2021-02-18T20:25:35+00:00 ITS#9161 - A few more typo fixes -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8977] Make IDL sizes configurable in back-mdb
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8977 --- Comment #13 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- (In reply to Quanah Gibson-Mount from comment #8) > --On Thursday, June 27, 2019 8:56 PM +0000 quanah(a)symas.com wrote: > > > --On Thursday, June 27, 2019 8:35 PM +0000 hyc(a)symas.com wrote: > > > >> No, because order is irrelevant for these. > > > > Cool, thanks! I'll continue on with deeper testing then. :) > > Given the current implementation of OpenLDAP, this feature is impossible to > use w/o recompiling OpenLDAP when a change to the IDL size is made. This > is because LDAP_PVT_THREAD_STACK_SIZE must be adjusted as well and that > requires a recompile. > > The default size for LDAP_PVT_THREAD_STACK_SIZE is: > > ( 1 * 1024 * 1024 * sizeof(void *) ) > > which works for an IDL size of 16 (2^16) which is 65536. > > If you change the IDL size, say to 22, then the new IDL size is: 4,194,304. > We then use this difference to find the offset we need to adjust > LDAP_PVT_THREAD_STACK_SIZE by: > > 4194304/65536 = 64 > > So it needs to be 64 time larger: > > ( 64 * 1024 * 1024 * sizeof(void *) ) > > > Generally, this feature is simply unusuable (currently) as a tunable given > the requirement for recompiling OpenLDAP to use it. I believe the above explanation is incorrect, so want to update it. 1024*1024^2 = 1,048,576 This appears to work with an idlexp of 20, which is also 1,048,576 So really what is required is that the LDAP_PVT_THREAD_STACK_SIZE_VALUE total needs to match the 2^idlexp value. So, 2^22 is 4,194,304, so in this case, the LDAP_PVT_THREAD_STACK_SIZE_VALUE would need to be recompiled as ( 4 * 1024 * 1024 * sizeof(void *) ) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9469] New: Codespell report for "LMDB" (on fossies.org)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9469 Issue ID: 9469 Summary: Codespell report for "LMDB" (on fossies.org) 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: --- From https://fossies.org/linux/test/lmdb-master.tar.gz/codespell.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 8977] Make IDL sizes configurable in back-mdb
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8977 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ, reviewed | Target Milestone|2.4.53 |2.6.0 Assignee|quanah(a)openldap.org |bugs(a)openldap.org --- Comment #12 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • a40f6bff by Quanah Gibson-Mount at 2021-02-18T18:47:40+00:00 ITS#8977 - Remove documentation for idlexp The idlexp feature depends on additional work that is not yet done. Remove documentation for the feature -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8835] update admin guide to use "openssl rehash" instead of c_rehash
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8835 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|--- |2.5.2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8835] update admin guide to use "openssl rehash" instead of c_rehash
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Feb '21

18 Feb '21

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8835 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |IN_PROGRESS --- Comment #2 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/merge_requests/246 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs