Le sam. 5 févr. 2022 à 20:57, Quanah Gibson-Mount quanah@fast-mail.org a écrit :
--On Friday, February 4, 2022 10:12 PM -0500 Dave Macias davama@gmail.com
wrote:
Is that the one I used to help maintain? I don't believe it's been updated for 2.5 and later, unless it was forked and someone else has started working on it.
Hello Quanah,
this is indeed a fork done inside LTB project, there was no git repo for this script (or I did not found it). Of course if there are changes in 2.5 log format, we can update the script.
Clément.
Hello,
Le 06/02/2022 à 14:19, Clément OUDOT a écrit :
Le sam. 5 févr. 2022 à 20:57, Quanah Gibson-Mount quanah@fast-mail.org a écrit :
--On Friday, February 4, 2022 10:12 PM -0500 Dave Macias <davama@gmail.com> wrote: > > > https://www.ltb-project.org/documentation/ldap-stats.html Is that the one I used to help maintain? I don't believe it's been updated for 2.5 and later, unless it was forked and someone else has started working on it.Hello Quanah,
this is indeed a fork done inside LTB project, there was no git repo for this script (or I did not found it). Of course if there are changes in 2.5 log format, we can update the script.
It does not seem there are much changes in log format in 2.5, am I wrong?
I have basically tested the ldap-stats script and it behaves correctly.
Of course with 2.6 that's a whole different ballgame.
Clément.
David
Hi,
Le 21/02/2022 à 15:43, David Coutadeur a écrit :
Hello,
Le 06/02/2022 à 14:19, Clément OUDOT a écrit :
Le sam. 5 févr. 2022 à 20:57, Quanah Gibson-Mount quanah@fast-mail.org a écrit :
--On Friday, February 4, 2022 10:12 PM -0500 Dave Macias <davama@gmail.com> wrote: > > > https://www.ltb-project.org/documentation/ldap-stats.html Is that the one I used to help maintain? I don't believe it's been updated for 2.5 and later, unless it was forked and someone else has started working on it.Hello Quanah,
this is indeed a fork done inside LTB project, there was no git repo for this script (or I did not found it). Of course if there are changes in 2.5 log format, we can update the script.
It does not seem there are much changes in log format in 2.5, am I wrong?
I have basically tested the ldap-stats script and it behaves correctly.
Of course with 2.6 that's a whole different ballgame.
For information, I have contributed patch for the ldap-stats provided by LDAP Toolbox:
https://github.com/ltb-project/ldap-scripts
There is a new option (--log26) for enabling compatibility with the new openLDAP 2.6 log format.
Feel free to use it and submit your remarks.
Regards,
David
Clément.
David
--On Monday, February 21, 2022 3:43 PM +0100 David Coutadeur david.coutadeur@gmail.com wrote:
It does not seem there are much changes in log format in 2.5, am I wrong?
Yes. There is a substanatial amount of information logged in 2.5 that is not logged in 2.4.
Regrds, Quanah
--On Monday, February 21, 2022 7:03 PM +0100 David Coutadeur david.coutadeur@gmail.com wrote:
For information, I have contributed patch for the ldap-stats provided by LDAP Toolbox:
I would suggest opening the pull request against the canonical upstream source of the script rather than the fork from ldap toolbox.
Regards, Quanah
* Quanah Gibson-Mount [21/02/2022 13:53] :
I would suggest opening the pull request against the canonical upstream source of the script rather than the fork from ldap toolbox.
Having an open PR against ldap-stats.pl's upstream for nearly two years now, I would suggest treating the LTB fork as the new canonical upstream.
Emmanuel
Hello,
For information, I have opened a pull request against the historical upstream repository:
https://github.com/Matty9191/misc-shell-scripts/pull/4
Yet it seems there is not much activity on this repository, as there are two pull requests opened since 3 or 4 years.
Yes. There is a substantial amount of information logged in 2.5 that
is not logged in 2.4.
Quanah, could you give some documentation or any pointer regarding the evolution of the log format?
Regards,
David
Le 21/02/2022 à 22:53, Quanah Gibson-Mount a écrit :
--On Monday, February 21, 2022 7:03 PM +0100 David Coutadeur david.coutadeur@gmail.com wrote:
For information, I have contributed patch for the ldap-stats provided by LDAP Toolbox:
I would suggest opening the pull request against the canonical upstream source of the script rather than the fork from ldap toolbox.
Regards, Quanah
--On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 9:41 AM +0100 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel@seyman.fr wrote:
- Quanah Gibson-Mount [21/02/2022 13:53] :
I would suggest opening the pull request against the canonical upstream source of the script rather than the fork from ldap toolbox.
Having an open PR against ldap-stats.pl's upstream for nearly two years now, I would suggest treating the LTB fork as the new canonical upstream.
I don't think they should be the canonical source though.
--Quanah
--On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 10:32 AM +0100 David Coutadeur david.coutadeur@gmail.com wrote:
Quanah, could you give some documentation or any pointer regarding the evolution of the log format?
One example would be the addition of "etime" and "qtime". Another would be logging the TLS protocol and TLS ciphers. There are likely other things that are present in 2.5+ depending on the operations involved.
--Quanah
openldap-technical@openldap.org
-
Clément OUDOT -
David Coutadeur -
Emmanuel Seyman -
Quanah Gibson-Mount