openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20959 discussions

(ITS#6312)
by neustradamus＠hotmail.com 30 Sep '09

30 Sep '09

--_add76be3-02e1-47b1-b978-259bce59b479_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You must change in configure and \include\PORTABLE.H : #define vsnprintf _vsnprintf with #if _MSC_VER < 1500 // 1500 =3D=3D VC++ 9.0 #define vsnprintf _vsnprintf #endif or #if _MSC_VER < 1500 #define vsnprintf _vsnprintf #endif Sorry for issues ITS#6313 at ITS#6318 but I have an error : "The system encountered a fatal error can't get info in find_id The last error code was: No such file or directory" Thanks in advance=2C Regards=2C Neustradamus =0A= _________________________________________________________________=0A= In=E9dit ! Des Emotic=F4nes D=E9jant=E9es! Installez les dans votre Messeng= er !=0A= http://www.ilovemessenger.fr/Emoticones/EmoticonesDejantees.aspx= --_add76be3-02e1-47b1-b978-259bce59b479_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> <head> <style></style> </head> <body class=3D'hmmessage'> You must change in configure and \include\PORTABLE.H : #define vsnpr= intf _vsnprintf with #if _MSC_VER &lt=3B 1500&nbsp=3B // 1500= =3D=3D VC++ 9.0 #define vsnprintf _vsnprintf #endif or <b= r> #if _MSC_VER &lt=3B 1500 #define vsnprintf _vsnprintf #endif <= br> Sorry for issues ITS#6313 at ITS#6318 but I have an error : "The sys= tem encountered a fatal error can't get info in find_id The last erro= r code was: No such file or directory" Thanks in advance=2C R= egards=2C Neustradamus <hr />Souhaitez vous =A0= =AB=A0=EAtre au bureau sans y =EAtre=A0=BB=A0? <a href=3D'http://www.micros= oft.com/france/windows/bts/default.mspx' target=3D'_new'>Oui je le veux !</= a></body> </html>= --_add76be3-02e1-47b1-b978-259bce59b479_--

1 0

(ITS#6319) opened files
by M8R-njfnr31＠mailinator.com 30 Sep '09

30 Sep '09

Full_Name: Miki Manó Version: 2.4.18 OS: debian linux URL: Submission from: (NULL) (91.120.159.49) hello i'm running slapd server with 100 clients over ssl. i see the server don't close the file descriptors always and the limit of open files is exceeded. how could i help your work to find this bug? file limit is reached too with following options: idletimeout 60 writetimeout 60 the creation time of file descriptors is older than 60s.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6311) configure --enable-dds/--enable-deref broken
by hyc＠symas.com 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

h.b.furuseth(a)usit.uio.no wrote: > Full_Name: Hallvard B Furuseth > Version: HEAD > OS: > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (129.240.6.233) > Submitted by: hallvard > > > configure.in says > if test "$ol_enable_deref" != no ; then > BUILD_DDS=$ol_enable_deref > instead of > BUILD_DEREF=$ol_enable_deref > That breaks e.g. --enable-dds --disable-deref. > Also BUILD_DEREF is not initialized and has no AC_SUBST(). > Is deref supposed to be in configure? > ITS#5768 says deref was committed to RE24 so presumably so. This is now fixed in HEAD... -- -- 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#6311) configure --enable-dds/--enable-deref broken
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

Full_Name: Hallvard B Furuseth Version: HEAD OS: URL: Submission from: (NULL) (129.240.6.233) Submitted by: hallvard configure.in says if test "$ol_enable_deref" != no ; then BUILD_DDS=$ol_enable_deref instead of BUILD_DEREF=$ol_enable_deref That breaks e.g. --enable-dds --disable-deref. Also BUILD_DEREF is not initialized and has no AC_SUBST(). Is deref supposed to be in configure?

1 0

Re: (ITS#6302) second-guessing of libsasl ABI is incorrect for Linux distributions
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

hyc(a)symas.com writes: > Though it goes against our usual desire to minimize distro-specific patch > maintenance, I think in this case I have to recommend that you continue to > carry this patch on your side. Wrap such code in #ifdef on OPTIMISTIC_LIBVERSION_SASL or something in OpenLDAP, so that people with 3rd party code done right can ./configure CPPFLAGS=-DOPTIMISTIC_LIBVERSION_SASL instead of patching the code? -- Hallvard

1 0

Re: (ITS#6305) slapo-chain(5): description for chain-rebind-as-user missing
by hyc＠symas.com 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

Michael Ströder wrote: > hyc(a)symas.com wrote: >> michael(a)stroeder.com wrote: >>> Full_Name: Michael Ströder >>> Version: HEAD >>> OS: >>> URL: >>> Submission from: (NULL) (84.163.127.85) >>> >>> >>> In slapo-chain(5) there is no descriptive text for configuration directive >>> 'chain-rebind-as-user' yet like for the other directives. >> >> rebind-as-user is in slapd-ldap(5) and the slapo-chain(5) manpage already states: >> >> >> >> There are very few chain overlay specific directives; however, directives >> related to the instances of the ldap backend that may be implicitly >> instantiated by the overlay may assume a special meaning when used in >> conjunction with this overlay. They are described in slapd−ldap(5), and they >> also need to be prefixed by chain−. >> << >> >> I don't see any need for action here, this ITS will be closed. > > I disagree. IMO each possible configuration directive should be mentioned > literally. I agree that the text could be limited to "this means 'foo' > prefixed with 'bar'". Too much duplication of effort, IMO. But feel free to submit a patch. -- -- 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#6305) slapo-chain(5): description for chain-rebind-as-user missing
by michael＠stroeder.com 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

hyc(a)symas.com wrote: > michael(a)stroeder.com wrote: >> Full_Name: Michael Ströder >> Version: HEAD >> OS: >> URL: >> Submission from: (NULL) (84.163.127.85) >> >> >> In slapo-chain(5) there is no descriptive text for configuration directive >> 'chain-rebind-as-user' yet like for the other directives. > > rebind-as-user is in slapd-ldap(5) and the slapo-chain(5) manpage already states: > > >> > There are very few chain overlay specific directives; however, directives > related to the instances of the ldap backend that may be implicitly > instantiated by the overlay may assume a special meaning when used in > conjunction with this overlay. They are described in slapd−ldap(5), and they > also need to be prefixed by chain−. > << > > I don't see any need for action here, this ITS will be closed. I disagree. IMO each possible configuration directive should be mentioned literally. I agree that the text could be limited to "this means 'foo' prefixed with 'bar'". Ciao, Michael.

1 0

RE: (ITS#6201) Double free in syncprov (fwd)
by quanah＠zimbra.com 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

Forwarding on... --Quanah ------------ Forwarded Message ------------ Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:54 PM +0100 From: Alister Winfield <Alister.Winfield(a)sns.bskyb.com> To: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)zimbra.com> Subject: RE: (ITS#6201) Double free in syncprov Sorry I thought I'd sent something. Sadly the test server had to go onto a live service so I don't have the original configuration but I do remember what was happening. Roughly the configuration looked something like.. MASTER ------ database hdb suffix "ou=branch1,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/branch1" checkpoint 128 5 subordinate overlay syncprov syncprov-checkpoint 1000 10 syncprov-sessionlog 1000 database hdb suffix "ou=branch2,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/branch2" checkpoint 128 5 subordinate overlay syncprov syncprov-checkpoint 1000 10 syncprov-sessionlog 1000 database hdb suffix "dc=test" rootdn "cn=replica,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/root" checkpoint 128 5 syncprov-checkpoint 1000 10 syncprov-sessionlog 1000 overlay glue overlay syncprov Note that the glue is before the syncprov not exactly sane as it means that the last sync provider covers the whole database which is overlapping with the other two databases. The slaves config mirrors the master with each database being replicated individually. So its configuration looked like. SLAVE ------ database hdb suffix "ou=branch1,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/branch1" checkpoint 128 5 subordinate syncrepl rid=001 provider="ldap://10.0.0.1/" type=RefreshAndPersist binddn="cn=replica,dc=test" bindmethod=simple credentials=password searchbase="ou=branch1,dc=sky,dc=com" retry="10 +" timeout=30 database hdb suffix "ou=branch2,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/branch2" checkpoint 128 5 subordinate syncrepl rid=002 provider="ldap://10.0.0.1/" type=RefreshAndPersist binddn="cn=replica,dc=test" bindmethod=simple credentials=password searchbase="ou=branch2,dc=test" retry="10 +" timeout=30 database hdb suffix "dc=test" rootdn "cn=replica,dc=test" directory "/data/ldap/root" checkpoint 128 5 overlay glue syncrepl rid=003 provider="ldap://10.0.0.1/" type=RefreshAndPersist binddn="cn=replica,dc=test" bindmethod=simple credentials=password searchbase="dc=test" retry="10 +" timeout=30 Make lots of changes under the branches and sooner or later I'd get the double free. Hopefully I remembered the situation correctly. -----Original Message----- From: Quanah Gibson-Mount [mailto:quanah@zimbra.com] Sent: 29 September 2009 00:56 To: openldap-its(a)openldap.org; Alister Winfield Subject: RE: (ITS#6201) Double free in syncprov --On Thursday, July 09, 2009 4:54 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > --On Thursday, July 09, 2009 10:18 AM +0000 > Alister.Winfield(a)sns.bskyb.com wrote: > >> I think I have it (bad configuration)... >> >> Okay so it might be a configuration 'error' but I guess its worth >> trying to= avoid the crash. > > Hi Alister, > > Can you provide an example of your misconfigured slapd for ease of > debugging? Obviously, this is non-critical but I agree it would be > nice to make sure this sort of configuration error is caught more > gracefully. Ping? Without said info, this ITS will be closed. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. Please note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication through our internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are trade marks of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and are used under licence. British Sky Broadcasting Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky Interactive Limited (Registration No. 3554332), Sky-In-Home Service Limited (Registration No. 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration No. 2340150) are direct or indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Registration No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph are incorporated in England and Wales and share the same registered office at Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD. ---------- End Forwarded Message ---------- -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

Re: (ITS#6303) Buffer overflow with new glibc
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

jzeleny(a)redhat.com writes: >> Could you test if this works instead? >> http://folk.uio.no/hbf/ol-struct-hack-1.patch >> If that doesn't work, similar code elsewhere may be in danger. > > This hack seems to work just fine. Thank you. > But I'd like to ask if it's the > right way to do it - I mean, as you said the code isn't run that > often, so there is no need to consider performance and I think my > patch offers cleaner solution. That discussion gets a bit bigger than the problem, but anyway: I'd say the right way to write it is the way we'd be happy to se people use it as demo/template code. So yes, even though the back-ldif code isn't executed much, it's good to use simple tricks like this anyway. As long as they are not buggy or unnecessarily complicate the code. The silly way to do it was to use a well-known but officially dubious trick, the struct hack, with a non-standard notation: "char fname;" instead of "char fname[1];", and macroized at that. I see several mentions on gcc.gnu.org about breaking and un-breaking the struct hack. I haven't looked closely, but for now I'll guess gcc doesn't see the original back-ldif code as the struct hack and doesn't un-break it: The code stores a struct bvlist object in the first part of the malloced memory, thus informing the compiler that any padding bytes in that bvlist object have unspecified values. Thus I guess the compiler is free to ignore whatever back-ldif puts in these bytes. Reading gcc.gnu.org about the struct hack was a bit unsettling though, so it seemed better to avoid it. Maybe others in the project have different opinion, I don't know. I seem to be arguing with myself about readability anyway:-) As for malloc, slapd's main problem with malloc is memory fragmentation. Performance comes second. And for both memory fragmentation and speed, the "righter" way for small data freed by the same thread would not be malloc() but ber_memalloc_x() or slap_sl_malloc() with a non-NULL context parameter. Oh well, maybe later - if anyone cares. -- Hallvard

1 0

(ITS#6310) Slapd with pcache crashes under load
by karavelov＠spnet.net 29 Sep '09

29 Sep '09

Full_Name: luben karavelov Version: 2.4.18 - HEAD OS: Debian Linux URL: Submission from: (NULL) (212.50.0.80) Hello, I have 2 running slapd servers for load balancing. The 2 instances are configured with back-sql and pcache overlay. Every 5-15 minutes one of the servers crashes. The config could be found here: http://purgatory.spnet.net/~karavelov/slapd.conf.h2 A gdb session with the resulting core dump could be found here: http://purgatory.spnet.net/~karavelov/gdb1 Without proxycache overlay the servers does not crash in this manner. The software tested is 1. slapd 2.4.18 with backported pcache.c from HEAD 2. slapd HEAD I could provide more info, just ask. Thanks in advance for help Luben

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