openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
21542 discussions

[Issue 8579] LMDB: me_fd should be O_CLOEXEC on POSIX systems
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8579 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |1.0.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- I see no reason not to do this. Some of the caveats about fork/exec are still overstated. LMDB uses fcntl() locks, not flock(), so some of the concerns about flock() semantics are irrelevant. There is nothing useful an exec'd process can do with the me_fd, so yes, let's close it. Fixed in mdb.master3 cf52db2bee52796bb4140b32679f4723a0d7d44f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8691] slapd crashes during shutdown
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8691 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- Unable to reproduce this any more. "--without-threads" is no longer a supported configuration. OpenLDAP 2.6 has no trouble starting/stopping on Windows. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 6198] Authorization for extensions
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6198 Ondřej Kuzník <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |https://bugs.openldap.org/s | |how_bug.cgi?id=10497 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8537] liblmdb errors with data=NULL and non-matching SET_KEY
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8537 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- Didn't see any crash in current mdb.master3, 9aa3ac00567db8d5222abea46325a8b882937350 I see EINVAL on case 9 with the test program, trying to use MDB_GET_CURRENT after and MDB_SET_KEY that returned MDB_NOTFOUND. This appears to be correct behavior, since the cursor isn't pointing at anything when MDB_NOTFOUND is returned. On the reported commit ID, the test program asserts on case 0, but that doesn't appear to be relevant any more. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9011] add mdb_txn_flags()
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9011 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #2 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- Why does a wrapper or binding care whether a txn is read-only or read-write? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8275] [PATCH 1/2] Add mdb_dbi_name() function to get database name from a handle
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8275 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #1 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- I don't see why this is necessary or useful. The caller supplied the name in the first place, why do they need to ask for it back? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8502] mdb_cursor_count() == EINVAL for empty DB
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Apr '26

22 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8502 --- Comment #2 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- (In reply to Hallvard Furuseth from comment #0) > Full_Name: Hallvard B Furuseth > Version: mdb.master, 26e226b2a8cdba4208eabca394537900c4eda3b3 > OS: > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (81.191.45.31) > Submitted by: hallvard > > > mdb_cursor_count() has code to return MDB_NOTFOUND if !mc_snum, > but it comes after if (! ... C_INITIALIZED) return EINVAL. It sounds like the NOTFOUND test should just be deleted then, because it's always unreachable. When a DB is emptied, all cursors on it are de-initialized since there is nothing for the cursors to point to. In an uninitialized cursor, none of the other state is meaningful, so mc->mc_snum is irrelevant. Changing the order of the tests would mean you get MDB_NOTFOUND even on a cursor on a non-empty DB, if it has never been used yet. Is that actually a more sensible result in that case? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8455] LMDB: mdb_env_copyfd1 leaks memory and pthread state if mdb_txn_begin fails
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Apr '26

22 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8455 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #1 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 8209 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8209] Broken MDB_CP_COMPACT threading
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Apr '26

22 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8209 --- Comment #10 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- *** Issue 8455 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8590] LMDB: Suppress SIGPIPE in mdb_env_copythr on OS X
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Apr '26

22 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8590 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Summary|LMDB: Suppress SIGPIPE in |LMDB: Suppress SIGPIPE in |mdb_env_copythr on OS X |mdb_env_copythr on OS X Resolution|--- |TEST --- Comment #4 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- Committed to git mdb.master / mdb.RE/0.9 / mdb.master3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs