openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20895 discussions

ITS#4545 bug in libldap
by hyc＠symas.com 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

I haven't quite figured out everything that's going on, but this patch definitely shows when it occurs in test036: Index: result.c =================================================================== RCS file: /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/libraries/libldap/result.c,v retrieving revision 1.140 diff -u -r1.140 result.c --- result.c 3 Dec 2006 23:11:12 -0000 1.140 +++ result.c 12 Dec 2006 22:53:25 -0000 @@ -914,6 +914,10 @@ } if ( lr != NULL ) { + if ( tag == LDAP_RES_SEARCH_RESULT ) { + Debug( LDAP_DEBUG_TRACE, "request done: ld %p msgid %ld but mis-handled!\n", + (void *)ld, (long) id, 0 ); + } ldap_return_request( ld, lr, 0 ); lr = NULL; } The response is actually returned to the caller properly, but we never decide to "mark request completed." Setting a breakpoint here will let you poke around at it. v3ref is set to V3REF_TOAPP at this point. This should mean that the result included a referral and it will be returned to the caller, which means that we can dispose of the request, but we never do. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#4777) translucent overlay breaks if first mod in modlist is a delete
by hyc＠symas.com 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

kuenne(a)rentec.com wrote: > Full_Name: Karsten Kuenne > Version: 2.3.30 > OS: Solaris 10 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (216.223.241.248) > > > The following loop in translucent.c at around line 297 fails if the first mod in > the modlist is a delete and eventually crashes slapd: This is now fixed in HEAD, thanks for the report. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

(ITS#4777) translucent overlay breaks if first mod in modlist is a delete
by kuenne＠rentec.com 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Full_Name: Karsten Kuenne Version: 2.3.30 OS: Solaris 10 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (216.223.241.248) The following loop in translucent.c at around line 297 fails if the first mod in the modlist is a delete and eventually crashes slapd: .... Debug(LDAP_DEBUG_TRACE, "=> translucent_modify: silently dropping delete: %s\n", m->sml_desc->ad_cname.bv_val, 0, 0); ==> for(mm = op->orm_modlist; mm->sml_next != m; mm = mm->sml_next); mm->sml_next = m->sml_next; m->sml_next = NULL; slap_mods_free(m, 1); .... I tried to come up with a fix but so far I always got a "Invalid modification" because I apparently got something wrong so I worked around it on the client side for now.

1 0

Re: (ITS#4770) monitoringslapd.sdf patch
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

<quote who="Howard Chu"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >> <quote who="hyc(a)symas.com"> >>> ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >>>> Full_Name: Gavin Henry >>>> Version: 2.3.30 >>>> OS: FC6 >>>> URL: >>>> http://www.suretecsystems.com/our_docs/admin-guide-monitoring.patch >>>> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85) >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Monitoring section updated. Please review and provide feedback. >>> You use the term "subentries" in several places where I'm pretty sure >>> you mean "child entries"; "subentry" has a special meaning in >>> X.500/LDAP >>> that isn't relevant here. >> >> Sure, that's what I meant really ;-) >> >> I'll update it and send another patch. Or is there an easier way? > > Your original patch is already in CVS now. Just send a diff against the > CVS version. New version with TOC set to 3: http://www.suretecsystems.com/our_docs/admin_guide.patch Thanks. -- Kind Regards, Gavin Henry. Managing Director. T +44 (0) 1224 279484 M +44 (0) 7930 323266 F +44 (0) 1224 824887 E ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com Open Source. Open Solutions(tm). http://www.suretecsystems.com/

1 0

Re: (ITS#4774) Add network timeout option to ldapsearch
by Kurt＠OpenLDAP.org 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

At 12:59 AM 12/12/2006, lukeh(a)padl.com wrote: >Full_Name: Luke Howard >Version: HEAD >OS: >URL: http://www.padl.com/~lukeh/openldap-HEAD-nto.diff >Submission from: (NULL) (203.13.32.80) > > >A customer had requested we add an option to ldapsearch to allow a network >timeout to be specified on the command line. > >A patch against HEAD is attached. > >I am aware that you can specify NETWORK_TIMEOUT in ldap.conf, and that free >command line options are precious. Given this, -e nettimeout=X might be better choice here. Or -o nettimeout=X.

1 0

(ITS#4776) slapo-chain(5) does not use the DN in the referral
by ando＠sys-net.it 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Full_Name: Pierangelo Masarati Version: HEAD,re23 OS: irrelevant URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (87.28.220.33) When chasing a referral, if the DN in the referral differs from the one in the original request slapo-chain(5) disregards it and uses the original request DN. This behavior disagrees with that of the client library. p.

1 0

(ITS#4774) Add network timeout option to ldapsearch
by lukeh＠padl.com 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

Full_Name: Luke Howard Version: HEAD OS: URL: http://www.padl.com/~lukeh/openldap-HEAD-nto.diff Submission from: (NULL) (203.13.32.80) A customer had requested we add an option to ldapsearch to allow a network timeout to be specified on the command line. A patch against HEAD is attached. I am aware that you can specify NETWORK_TIMEOUT in ldap.conf, and that free command line options are precious.

1 0

Re: (ITS#4770) monitoringslapd.sdf patch
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

<quote who="Howard Chu"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >> <quote who="hyc(a)symas.com"> >>> ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >>>> Full_Name: Gavin Henry >>>> Version: 2.3.30 >>>> OS: FC6 >>>> URL: >>>> http://www.suretecsystems.com/our_docs/admin-guide-monitoring.patch >>>> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85) >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Monitoring section updated. Please review and provide feedback. >>> You use the term "subentries" in several places where I'm pretty sure >>> you mean "child entries"; "subentry" has a special meaning in >>> X.500/LDAP >>> that isn't relevant here. >> >> Sure, that's what I meant really ;-) >> >> I'll update it and send another patch. Or is there an easier way? > > Your original patch is already in CVS now. Just send a diff against the > CVS version. Thanks. > > -- > -- Howard Chu > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com > Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc > OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/ >

1 0

Re: (ITS#4770) monitoringslapd.sdf patch
by hyc＠symas.com 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: > <quote who="hyc(a)symas.com"> >> ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >>> Full_Name: Gavin Henry >>> Version: 2.3.30 >>> OS: FC6 >>> URL: http://www.suretecsystems.com/our_docs/admin-guide-monitoring.patch >>> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85) >>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Monitoring section updated. Please review and provide feedback. >> You use the term "subentries" in several places where I'm pretty sure >> you mean "child entries"; "subentry" has a special meaning in X.500/LDAP >> that isn't relevant here. > > Sure, that's what I meant really ;-) > > I'll update it and send another patch. Or is there an easier way? Your original patch is already in CVS now. Just send a diff against the CVS version. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#4770) monitoringslapd.sdf patch
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

<quote who="hyc(a)symas.com"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >> Full_Name: Gavin Henry >> Version: 2.3.30 >> OS: FC6 >> URL: http://www.suretecsystems.com/our_docs/admin-guide-monitoring.patch >> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85) >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> Monitoring section updated. Please review and provide feedback. > > You use the term "subentries" in several places where I'm pretty sure > you mean "child entries"; "subentry" has a special meaning in X.500/LDAP > that isn't relevant here. Sure, that's what I meant really ;-) I'll update it and send another patch. Or is there an easier way? Thanks. > > -- > -- Howard Chu > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com > Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc > OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/ > > >

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs