openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20959 discussions

(ITS#7891) checking for SQLDriverConnect in -lodbc
by vbvbrj＠gmail.com 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

Full_Name: Mimiko Version: 2.4.39 OS: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.2.57-3+deb7u2 x86_64 GNU/Linux URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (77.89.245.38) Can not compile OpenLDAP statically. I get this error: configure:21678: checking for SQLDriverConnect in -lodbc configure:21703: cc -o conftest -fPIC -static-libgcc -static -fPIC -I/opt/openssl/include -I/opt/krb5/include -I/opt/zlib/include -Wl,-R,ORIGIN/../lib/../lib/../lib/../lib../lib:ORIGIN/../lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -L/opt/openssl/lib -L/opt/krb5/lib -L/opt/zlib/lib conftest.c -lodbc -pthread >&5 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(_odbcinst_UserINI.o): In function `_odbcinst_UserINI': (.text+0x3b): warning: Using 'getpwuid' in statically linked applications requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(SQLCreateDataSource.o): In function `SQLCreateDataSource': (.text+0x301): undefined reference to `lt_dlinit' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(SQLCreateDataSource.o): In function `SQLCreateDataSource': (.text+0x315): undefined reference to `lt_dlsetsearchpath' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(SQLCreateDataSource.o): In function `SQLCreateDataSource': (.text+0x33d): undefined reference to `lt_dlopen' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(SQLCreateDataSource.o): In function `SQLCreateDataSource': (.text+0x355): undefined reference to `lt_dlsym' /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/libodbc.a(SQLCreateDataSource.o): In function `SQLCreateDataSource': (.text+0x3ee): undefined reference to `lt_dlopen' .... collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status configure:21703: $? = 1 To resolve this I must supply LIBS='-lltdl -ldl', but ./configure script does not pass this correctly, as this LIBS must be after -lodbc. In configure line 21684 is the line: LIBS="-lodbc $LIBS" It seems that LIBS which I pass to ./configure script does not get there. So I modify ./configure like this: LIBS="-lodbc -lltdl -ldl $LIBS" Please update ./configure script in git to overcome this error without manually modifying script.

1 0

Re: (ITS#7889) rwm overlay causes incorrect acl parsing
by alexoz66＠gmail.com 03 Jul '14

03 Jul '14

Hi Michael, I tried to enable this setting using the following ldif: dn: olcOverlay={0}rwm,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config changetype: modify add: olcRwmDropUnrequested olcRwmDropUnrequested: FALSE but I get the following error: modifying entry "olcOverlay={0}rwm,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config" ldap_modify: Object class violation (65) additional info: attribute 'olcRwmDropUnrequested' not allowed Looking at the schema it seems that the attribute olcRwmDropUnrequested is not part of the olcRwmConfig object class (or any other object class for that matter). On 02/07/2014 08:48 μμ, Michael Ströder wrote: > alexoz66(a)gmail.com wrote: >> When enabling the rwm overlay on a database, even without setting any rewrite >> rules, in certain cases some access rules are not evaluated correctly. > > I did not look into your posting in detail. > > But could you please check whether this setting helps: > > rwm-drop-unrequested-attrs no > > Ciao, Michael. >

1 0

(ITS#7890) Drop support for BDB 6.0.20 and later
by quanah＠OpenLDAP.org 02 Jul '14

02 Jul '14

Full_Name: Quanah Gibson-Mount Version: 2.4.39 OS: Linux 2.6 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (75.111.58.125) Due to licensing changes made to BerkeleyDB by Oracle, it is now incompatible for use with OpenLDAP. Support for BDB 6.0.20 and later should be rejected by configure.

1 0

Re: (ITS#7889) rwm overlay causes incorrect acl parsing
by michael＠stroeder.com 02 Jul '14

02 Jul '14

This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms010205050403050104070307 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable alexoz66(a)gmail.com wrote: > When enabling the rwm overlay on a database, even without setting any r= ewrite > rules, in certain cases some access rules are not evaluated correctly. I did not look into your posting in detail. But could you please check whether this setting helps: rwm-drop-unrequested-attrs no Ciao, Michael. --------------ms010205050403050104070307 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIFfzCC BXswggNjoAMCAQICAwxOfTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADB5MRAwDgYDVQQKEwdSb290IENBMR4w HAYDVQQLExVodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNhY2VydC5vcmcxIjAgBgNVBAMTGUNBIENlcnQgU2lnbmlu ZyBBdXRob3JpdHkxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEnN1cHBvcnRAY2FjZXJ0Lm9yZzAeFw0xMjEw MDIyMDE3MDlaFw0xNDEwMDIyMDE3MDlaMD8xGDAWBgNVBAMUD01pY2hhZWwgU3Ry9mRlcjEj MCEGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYUbWljaGFlbEBzdHJvZWRlci5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUA A4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDo2SKth5GhtaDrCyfGtyUG+/hAAa/J52L0NFN4SSRvTtdGf9HfWwwd NCtgae0TVGWk2lKDbXA9d5vmyIiRhuwxd90H6FLErhRBeB9G67qtw87E8WUoXt2DwPQEUTWV hqHpPadlmgFw3+i3TGQQTe3O3W9MMMd4GJNhObem2VGRuCD37OXnzBksTcq0FPJgcWAhe3d/ 0ItOkNWBqgq8Mf3p7WFBhaQ0a27BC/mKtH8fI3kPcS305imPRja69Msq3EwUZBc9ToVp6FRQ NYKjfOBybDUzVkmRZl3H8xutQP2w8Zxb8m5f7Q1BfLLrIFScfYvIDgOERxTCd4lab8+/09XH AgMBAAGjggFEMIIBQDAMBgNVHRMBAf8EAjAAMFYGCWCGSAGG+EIBDQRJFkdUbyBnZXQgeW91 ciBvd24gY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgZm9yIEZSRUUgaGVhZCBvdmVyIHRvIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuQ0Fj ZXJ0Lm9yZzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCA6gwQAYDVR0lBDkwNwYIKwYBBQUHAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMC BgorBgEEAYI3CgMEBgorBgEEAYI3CgMDBglghkgBhvhCBAEwMgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEJjAkMCIG CCsGAQUFBzABhhZodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5jYWNlcnQub3JnMDEGA1UdHwQqMCgwJqAkoCKGIGh0 dHA6Ly9jcmwuY2FjZXJ0Lm9yZy9yZXZva2UuY3JsMB8GA1UdEQQYMBaBFG1pY2hhZWxAc3Ry b2VkZXIuY29tMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4ICAQC9ouXq3p/bDWMM4tBKgD3tl4HY5H0eECl8 q9/nqk0UL6YeWkrCiQdrDtNPW7DcGqNYtzdgtzmyTr1GhiAX+igrOjdk/ge5NRcQOpONK/4b zrmpQEcIUyxSSDKLWh211/kcFfxxLEiJ5teF4GL8Fc1qbrLP4+DCvJXWfYaaR5NLjZMqm2VP yKTv3qpXWnGohiRkGTwS/11QM2XCfIGdRsQT9a8mO4m2fn2tGPp2TEIoCLrDDrbGVeDWaOWB OIeTrp4wa3Q4OI6yCptJhEqKvjhV96IBRYgM76nTBqsqnDzwxExAyhhWiUS5DunRHOr/+NyF pUpD4883RBLO0g9kUEGOhtZNF1u+8zEL0YgMGvifAom9JEklLOXZuqj0MThypKs/3d/OyOQb 4gURnu6oZwcKZ7LskytWnlRKUxF6o0A8grtmyKkqe14TS7cQbg0NTaIYXPkHR+dfFmb3uEqn BBjvpJXFcEtWI2lQXC/ET+au991pK797ExBOmpQwjIn3SjiW80vw/UoL6DMvqY/6JhVhyNTP MJ2W5AX5kc27DIbVtVGZs8J4AYhuNALJUq9N9Ka7rPRj3RcYDrfehDLOkM5iMnarpmtuOpLK d1SvZhqj/0N/JWGIDpPSTkTFOPP6ZN9I9Rqyf+9NGqb2sjo4DkIiZcHxt735/GJLwus5KLBl 2DGCA6EwggOdAgEBMIGAMHkxEDAOBgNVBAoTB1Jvb3QgQ0ExHjAcBgNVBAsTFWh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuY2FjZXJ0Lm9yZzEiMCAGA1UEAxMZQ0EgQ2VydCBTaWduaW5nIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8G CSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3VwcG9ydEBjYWNlcnQub3JnAgMMTn0wCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAfUwGAYJ KoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTQwNzAyMTc0ODQxWjAj BgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUE4MHle0RyplcgMVd5hu9mz/RV4MwbAYJKoZIhvcNAQkPMV8wXTAL BglghkgBZQMEASowCwYJYIZIAWUDBAECMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDAN BggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDCBkQYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYGD MIGAMHkxEDAOBgNVBAoTB1Jvb3QgQ0ExHjAcBgNVBAsTFWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2FjZXJ0Lm9y ZzEiMCAGA1UEAxMZQ0EgQ2VydCBTaWduaW5nIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYS c3VwcG9ydEBjYWNlcnQub3JnAgMMTn0wgZMGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMYGDoIGAMHkxEDAOBgNV BAoTB1Jvb3QgQ0ExHjAcBgNVBAsTFWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2FjZXJ0Lm9yZzEiMCAGA1UEAxMZ Q0EgQ2VydCBTaWduaW5nIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3VwcG9ydEBjYWNl cnQub3JnAgMMTn0wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAV/EKe7P7+g4bTiu9Rrr+3cxNkzm454+/ bM9YZqssuW1Hgn67KbwDvDn3PydPCa7vtw0XKjgnI+RtaJg3077qva8wCheE0U3c16e4Aj8+ J6llfig38qrU2Jfu3J2MPHIzx5aBdLxst2sr8gaLoPihZQJewspn6PHD6Sorce8JQf1lI2Je 9/Qzb1CvGXQ/2GEfdokx/cA381cYug12yLkYKHexx5x09YKvMKOvC/ZhD9rLtuURS/Bhk/lf 62GMt7aIF2YH8xx5fOKv2pFD9LNqkA/jq3o4iDLxsd4OsQhtjgsMzKfVkRbyGKjA71aoJXCE Z87gtOZ6MVu6oeUk+DneIgAAAAAAAA== --------------ms010205050403050104070307--

1 0

(ITS#7889) rwm overlay causes incorrect acl parsing
by alexoz66＠gmail.com 02 Jul '14

02 Jul '14

Full_Name: John Alex. Version: 2.4.39 OS: FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (62.1.253.119) When enabling the rwm overlay on a database, even without setting any rewrite rules, in certain cases some access rules are not evaluated correctly. My test configuration (without the cn=schema,cn=config entries): dn: cn=config objectClass: olcGlobal cn: config olcConfigFile: slapd.conf olcConfigDir: slapd.d olcArgsFile: /var/run/openldap/slapd.args olcAttributeOptions: lang- olcLogLevel: stats acl olcPidFile: /var/run/openldap/slapd.pid olcTLSCRLCheck: none olcTLSVerifyClient: never olcTLSProtocolMin: 0.0 dn: cn=module{0},cn=config objectClass: olcModuleList cn: module{0} olcModulePath: /usr/local/libexec/openldap olcModuleLoad: {0}back_mdb dn: olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig objectClass: olcFrontendConfig olcDatabase: {-1}frontend olcAccess: {0}to * by dn.base="gidNumber=0+uidNumber=0,cn=peercred,cn=external ,cn=auth" manage by * break olcAccess: {1}to dn.base="" by * read olcAccess: {2}to dn.base="cn=subschema" by * read olcSchemaDN: cn=Subschema dn: olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig olcDatabase: {0}config olcAccess: {0}to * by dn.base="gidNumber=0+uidNumber=0,cn=peercred,cn=external ,cn=auth" manage olcAddContentAcl: TRUE olcRootDN: cn=admin,cn=config olcRootPW:: dGVzdDEyMw== dn: olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig objectClass: olcMdbConfig olcDatabase: {1}mdb olcDbDirectory: /var/db/openldap-data/main olcSuffix: dc=example,dc=com olcRootDN: cn=admin,dc=example,dc=com olcDbIndex: objectClass eq olcDbIndex: ou,uid eq olcDbMaxSize: 4294967296 olcAccess: {0}to * by dn.base="gidNumber=0+uidNumber=0,cn=peercred,cn=external ,cn=auth" manage by * break olcAccess: {1}to dn.one="ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" filter="(ou=someunit)" a ttrs=userPassword by * none olcAccess: {2}to dn.subtree="ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" by dn.base="cn=suser ,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" read by * break olcAccess: {3}to attrs=userPassword by anonymous auth olcAccess: {4}to dn.base="dc=example,dc=com" by * read olcAccess: {5}to dn.subtree="ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" by * read olcRootPW:: dGVzdDEyMw== dn: olcOverlay={0}rwm,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config objectClass: olcRwmConfig objectClass: olcOverlayConfig objectClass: olcConfig objectClass: top olcOverlay: {0}rwm ------------------------------------------------- And the contents of the main db: dn: dc=example,dc=com objectClass: organization objectClass: top objectClass: dcObject dc: example o: example.com dn: ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: organizationalUnit objectClass: top ou: admins dn: ou=people,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: organizationalUnit objectClass: top ou: people dn: cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com sn: - cn: suser objectClass: person objectClass: top userPassword:: dGVzdDEyMw== dn: uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com uid: jdoe sn: Doe cn: John Doe objectClass: inetOrgPerson objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: top ou: someunit userPassword:: dGVzdDEyMw== ------------------------------------------------- The above rules should not allow anyone but the local root user access to the userPassword attribute of entries under "ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" that match the filter (ou=someunit). slapacl confirms that for user 'suser': % slapacl -F /usr/local/etc/openldap/slapd.d/ -v -D "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" -b "uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" authcDN: "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" entry: read(=rscxd) children: read(=rscxd) uid=jdoe: read(=rscxd) sn=Doe: read(=rscxd) cn=John Doe: read(=rscxd) objectClass=inetOrgPerson: read(=rscxd) objectClass=organizationalPerson: read(=rscxd) objectClass=person: read(=rscxd) objectClass=top: read(=rscxd) structuralObjectClass=inetOrgPerson: read(=rscxd) entryUUID=a6478f94-80df-1033-8692-c5a9d2143987: read(=rscxd) creatorsName=cn=admin,dc=example,dc=com: read(=rscxd) createTimestamp=20140605092934Z: read(=rscxd) ou=someunit: read(=rscxd) userPassword=****: none(=0) entryCSN=20140605093709.772129Z#000000#000#000000: read(=rscxd) modifiersName=cn=admin,dc=example,dc=com: read(=rscxd) modifyTimestamp=20140605093709Z: read(=rscxd) % slapacl -F /usr/local/etc/openldap/slapd.d/ -v -D "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" -b "uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" userPassword/read authcDN: "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" read access to userPassword: DENIED ------------------------------------------------- Requesting all attributes of the entry "uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" yields the expected result: % ldapsearch -LLL -H ldapi:/// -D "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -b "ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" "uid=jdoe" dn: uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com uid: jdoe sn: Doe cn: John Doe objectClass: inetOrgPerson objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: top ou: someunit However, when requesting the userPassword attribute explicitly, the rule that blocks access to that attribute is somehow ignored: % ldapsearch -LLL -H ldapi:/// -D "cn=suser,ou=admins,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -b "ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" "uid=jdoe" "userPassword" dn: uid=jdoe,ou=people,dc=example,dc=com userPassword:: dGVzdDEyMw== ------------------------------------------------- Removing either the "filter=(ou=someunit)" or the "attrs=userPassword" part of the corresponding rule results in correct parsing of the ACL in the above cases, but in order for the full rule to work, I had to remove the rwm overlay configuration completely (setting "rwm-rewriteEngine off" did not make a difference). # /usr/local/libexec/slapd -V @(#) $OpenLDAP: slapd 2.4.39 (May 9 2014 09:26:03) $

1 0

(ITS#7888) client configuration---openldap n-way multi-master replication
by idpbg-it-dba＠mail.foxconn.com 01 Jul '14

01 Jul '14

Full_Name: Robert.YQ.Feng Version: 2.4.23-31 OS: redhat linux 6.4 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (218.29.136.228) Hi man: Who can do me a big favor, I has been configuration my LDAP Server with N-way multi-master Mode. The syncronization working good with eachother in 4 masters. My issue is How to right configuration the client's URI and to let my LDAP client have tow ldapservers and to guarantee the authentication have redundancy . Best regards. Robert.YQ.Feng

1 0

Re: (ITS#7877) please make gcrypt optional with newer gnutls
by hyc＠symas.com 01 Jul '14

01 Jul '14

ryan(a)nardis.ca wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >> The only reason GnuTLS support exists in OpenLDAP is because of Debian. >> Therefore, if Debian no longer uses libgcrypt, I'm happy to rip all of that >> crap out. > > Sounds good to me. So a patch that removes gcrypt entirely looks like: > > ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0001-ITS-7877-use-nettle-in… > > (I assume the explicit threading setup is important, if not maybe the > gnutls_global_set_mutex part could be removed too...) > > That requires gnutls 2.12.0 or newer, so then I think we can also > remove the compatibility code for older versions: > > ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0002-assume-gnutls-provides… > ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0003-assume-gnutls-is-at-le… > >> Just tell us at which version of GnuTLS you switched to nettle and we'll make >> that the minimum supported version. > > Debian builds gnutls with nettle starting from 3.0.0. The API used in > tls_g.c is all backend agnostic though. I tried with 2.12.20 (with > gcrypt backend) and everything looks fine in slapd and clients > including the threading setup. I think 2.12.0 as minimum version would > be fine, and then nettle vs gcrypt only matters for smbk5pwd users. > > Thanks for considering my patches. Committed to master. I've also added a check for 2.12.0 to the configure script. -- -- 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#7877) please make gcrypt optional with newer gnutls
by ryan＠nardis.ca 30 Jun '14

30 Jun '14

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > The only reason GnuTLS support exists in OpenLDAP is because of Debian. > Therefore, if Debian no longer uses libgcrypt, I'm happy to rip all of that > crap out. Sounds good to me. So a patch that removes gcrypt entirely looks like: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0001-ITS-7877-use-nettle-in… (I assume the explicit threading setup is important, if not maybe the gnutls_global_set_mutex part could be removed too...) That requires gnutls 2.12.0 or newer, so then I think we can also remove the compatibility code for older versions: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0002-assume-gnutls-provides… ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/20140630_rtandy_0003-assume-gnutls-is-at-le… > Just tell us at which version of GnuTLS you switched to nettle and we'll make > that the minimum supported version. Debian builds gnutls with nettle starting from 3.0.0. The API used in tls_g.c is all backend agnostic though. I tried with 2.12.20 (with gcrypt backend) and everything looks fine in slapd and clients including the threading setup. I think 2.12.0 as minimum version would be fine, and then nettle vs gcrypt only matters for smbk5pwd users. Thanks for considering my patches.

1 0

Re: (ITS#7877) please make gcrypt optional with newer gnutls
by hyc＠symas.com 30 Jun '14

30 Jun '14

hyc(a)symas.com wrote: > ryan(a)nardis.ca wrote: >> Full_Name: Ryan Tandy >> Version: HEAD >> OS: Debian unstable >> URL: >> Submission from: (NULL) (142.32.208.235) >> The following changes make gcrypt optional for libldap. For versions where both >> nettle and gcrypt are supported, I assume the default since no mechanism is >> provided for detecting which is actually in use. > > Yet another flaw in GnuTLS design... > >> Tested with GnuTLS 2.8.6 and >> 3.2.15. Just tell us at which version of GnuTLS you switched to nettle and we'll make that the minimum supported version. -- -- 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#7877) please make gcrypt optional with newer gnutls
by hyc＠symas.com 30 Jun '14

30 Jun '14

ryan(a)nardis.ca wrote: > Full_Name: Ryan Tandy > Version: HEAD > OS: Debian unstable > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (142.32.208.235) > > > Debian bug report: https://bugs.debian.org/745231 > > Quoting Andreas Metzler: > > "given that gmp has been dual-licensed LGPLv3+/GPLv2+ it should be possible to > switch openldap over to the newer version of gnutls. > > Upstream's 0205e83f4670d10ad3c6ae4b8fc5ec1d0c7020c0 lets the Debian package > build successfully (including testsuite). The only reason GnuTLS support exists in OpenLDAP is because of Debian. Therefore, if Debian no longer uses libgcrypt, I'm happy to rip all of that crap out. There's no reason for us to even keep optional support for it because that gives the mistaken impression that we endorse its use. Which we most vehemently do not. > However even with patch there is still some work to be done. > libraries/libldap/tls_g.c has some gcrypt related code that should be simply > unnecessary with gnutls3, therefore it should not link against libgcrypt either. > (Except for contrib/slapd-modules/smbk5pwd/smbk5pwd.c)." > > The following changes make gcrypt optional for libldap. For versions where both > nettle and gcrypt are supported, I assume the default since no mechanism is > provided for detecting which is actually in use. Yet another flaw in GnuTLS design... > Tested with GnuTLS 2.8.6 and > 3.2.15. -- -- 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

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