https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8240
--- Comment #21 from Mehmet gelisin <mehmetgelisin(a)aol.com> ---
List message:
When bulk-renaming entries in web2ldap I do *not* alter the RDN of the entry
but also send delold: 0 in the MODRDN operation. IMO this is most minimal
invasive approach.
http://www-look-4.com/
This works ok in most setups.
But in a more strict setup (release 2.4.41) with slapo-constraint and
constraints on the RDN's characteristic attribute those MODRDN requests
http://www.compilatori.com/
trigger a constraint and fails with 'Constraint violation' although the RDN
value is not changed. I can't tell whether this was different with older
OpenLDAP releases.
http://www.wearelondonmade.com/
Even more strange: It works with delold: 1.
So I could easily alter web2ldap's behaviour to send delold: 1. But I'm not
sure whether that's the right general
http://www.jopspeech.com/ approach
especially when thinking about
all the other LDAP servers out there.
http://joerg.li/
So the question is: Is this an overzealous misbehaviour of slapo-constraint
and should it be fixed therein?
List message:
http://connstr.net/
When bulk-renaming entries in web2ldap I do *not* alter the RDN of the entry
but also send delold: 0 in the MODRDN operation. IMO this is most minimal
invasive approach.
This works ok in most setups.
http://embermanchester.uk/
But in a more strict setup (release 2.4.41) with slapo-constraint and
constraints on the RDN's characteristic attribute those MODRDN requests
trigger a constraint and fails with 'Constraint violation' although the RDN
value is not changed. I can't tell whether this was different with older
OpenLDAP releases.
http://www.slipstone.co.uk/
Even more strange: It works with delold: 1.
So I could easily alter web2ldap's behaviour to send delold: 1. But I'm not
sure whether that's the right general approach especially when thinking about
all the other LDAP servers out there.
http://www.logoarts.co.uk/
So the question is: Is this an overzealous misbehaviour of slapo-constraint
and should it be fixed therein?
List message:
http://www.acpirateradio.co.uk/
When bulk-renaming entries in web2ldap I do *not* alter the RDN of the entry
but also send delold: 0 in the MODRDN operation. IMO this is most minimal
invasive approach.
This works ok in most setups.
But in a more strict setup (release 2.4.41) with slapo-constraint and
https://waytowhatsnext.com/
constraints on the RDN's characteristic attribute those MODRDN requests
trigger a constraint and fails with 'Constraint violation' although the RDN
value is not changed. I can't tell whether this was different with older
OpenLDAP releases.
https://www.webb-dev.co.uk/
Even more strange: It works with delold: 1.
So I could easily alter web2ldap's behaviour to send delold: 1. But I'm not
sure whether that's the right general approach especially when thinking about
all the other LDAP servers out there.
So the question is: Is this an overzealous misbehaviour of slapo-constraint
and should
http://www.iu-bloomington.com/ it be fixed therein?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.