Quanah Gibson-Mount writes:
Hm, for #2, some sort of intelligent sort, since LDAP doesn't support the concept of ordered results, any test relying on order is fundamentally flawed. ;) That'd deal with all backends correctly, I would think.
ldapsearch -S "" sorts by DN. But such a change cascades into large changes to the testdata files, and IIRC there are a few tests where a specific order is expected. Don't quite remember.
So when testing back-ldif I modify scripts/acfilter.sh to sort some LDIF output files before comparing them. If Perl is present I sort by DN (I think), and it could sort the lines in each entry too. Probably loses some possible errors, but not many. E.g. where an LDIF to be compared consists of the concatenated output of several commands. Without Perl it just sorts line by line. Better than nothing. If anyone cares we could write an LDIF-sort program in C.
(I'm about ready to resume my back-ldif changes now that things seem to pass make test again. Will wait for 2.4.10 to be released to avoid interfering.)
#1 has always somewhat annoyed me, since I'd generally think you would see all relevant objectClasses included in an objects output. Is there an RFC covering it either way?
Ah, ITS#5517 (add superclass of existing class fails)...