[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (ITS#6076) slapo-collect: slapd repeatable segfaults caused by deletion of a single olcCollectInfo config value (when olcCollectInfo contains multiple configuration values)
- To: openldap-its@OpenLDAP.org
- Subject: Re: (ITS#6076) slapo-collect: slapd repeatable segfaults caused by deletion of a single olcCollectInfo config value (when olcCollectInfo contains multiple configuration values)
- From: daniel@pluta.biz
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 12:10:52 GMT
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated (OpenLDAP-ITS)
Hallvard B Furuseth schrieb:
> Yes, the on-th-fly sorting combined with the delete-single-value
> code seems broken. I'm not sure if delete-single-value could ever
> be invoked
Of course could it be "invoked" before: just use slapd 2.4.16 together
with slapo-collect and your favorit ldapmodify client. Right after the
"invocation" you'll get an error message complaining about a missing
equality rule.
Thus there's no hint within collect's source that the single-value
delete is faulty I inserted an equality rule and began to wonder...
> before you inserted an EQUALITY matching rule though.
Do you mean the single-value-delete functionality has been silently
"disabled" by removing the EQUALITY matching rule leaving
slapo-collect's by design defective single-value-delete code block
knowingly unchanged/uncommented?
This seems very strange to me even more because slapo-collect is
advertises as demonstration overlay (ok, a "quick hacked" one but
nevertheless questionable).
> I too don't know cn=config all that well:-(
<speculation>
Instead of correcting handling this issue only in collect.c there
perhabs exists a more general possibility to pimp the cn=config internal
add mechanisms regarding the handling of ordered config values? In my
opinion a very important feature concerning "overlapping"...
Á la:
cfg_value_add(.., .., SLAPD_CFG_VALSORT_ALPHA|SLAPD_CFG_VALSORT_DN|..)
only problem seems to be how to sort a configuration value like:
'"ou=test,dc=foo,dc=bar" l,st' by DN's depth
</speculation>