IMO this example clearly shows that the {} approach is a hack limited to certain use-cases (e.g. ACLs etc. in back-config).
Ciao, Michael.
Benin Technologies wrote:
Hi Quanah,
I just found an old post of yours, and I'd be interested to know if and how you solved that problem, because I ran into the same need.
Thanks Ben
- *To*: *openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org mailto:openldap-devel%40OpenLDAP.org*
- *Subject*: *valsort & telephoneNumber*
- *From*: *Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@stanford.edu mailto:quanah%40stanford.edu>*
- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 21:11:07 -0700
- Content-disposition: inline
We would like to be able to use valsort to weight telephoneNumber values in OpenLDAP. However, modifications of that type get rejected by the SYNTAX validation for telephoneNumber because it contains {}'s. Is it reasonable to expect to be able to override the SYNTAX in this case? Should valsort be modified to do so? Basically, the desired behavior would be for the non-weighted part (i.e., the actual data) of the value to be validated via the SYNTAX rules, but the weight part at the beginning ignored.
--Quanah
-- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Developer ITS/Shared Application Services Stanford University GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html http://www.stanford.edu/%7Equanah/pgp.html