ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s prints SASL-related messages on stderr by default, unless you specify LDAP_SASL_QUIET.
This seems wrong. The whole point of the "interact" function is to handle any required conversation with the user. In particular, in a GUI application these messages won't go to the user; more likely they will just clutter up some log.
Would the OpenLDAP community be receptive to a patch that directs these messages through the "interact" function?
(I think they have very little value and should just be dropped; that would be OK too.)
SASL username: somename@EXAMPLE.COM SASL SSF: 56 SASL data security layer installed.
Any comments on this?
On 3/4/2021 4:05 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s prints SASL-related messages on stderr by default, unless you specify LDAP_SASL_QUIET.
This seems wrong. The whole point of the "interact" function is to handle any required conversation with the user. In particular, in a GUI application these messages won't go to the user; more likely they will just clutter up some log.
Would the OpenLDAP community be receptive to a patch that directs these messages through the "interact" function?
(I think they have very little value and should just be dropped; that would be OK too.)
SASL username: somename@EXAMPLE.COM SASL SSF: 56 SASL data security layer installed.-- Jordan Brown, Oracle ZFS Storage Appliance, Oracle Solaris
Jordan Brown wrote:
Any comments on this?
No strong opinion. Generally, interact is only for prompts - messages that expect input from the user in response. Informational messages that don't require any response don't seem to apply.
On 3/4/2021 4:05 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s prints SASL-related messages on stderr by default, unless you specify LDAP_SASL_QUIET.
This seems wrong. The whole point of the "interact" function is to handle any required conversation with the user. In particular, in a GUI application these messages won't go to the user; more likely they will just clutter up some log.
Would the OpenLDAP community be receptive to a patch that directs these messages through the "interact" function?
(I think they have very little value and should just be dropped; that would be OK too.)
SASL username: somename@EXAMPLE.COM SASL SSF: 56 SASL data security layer installed.-- Jordan Brown, Oracle ZFS Storage Appliance, Oracle Solaris
-- Jordan Brown, Oracle ZFS Storage Appliance, Oracle Solaris
-
Howard Chu -
Jordan Brown