[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: ldapmodify/LDIF problem
Hi,
I have checked this suggestion and it doesn't seem to work when I just give
a replace command with nothing to replace (in a replication file)
replace: uid
--
replace: name
name: test
It probably bombs out on the first replace. Doesn't this change only work
for the following:
replace: uid
uid:
--
replace: name
name: test
So when you give nothing to the replacement string?
> ----------
> From: Kurt D. Zeilenga[SMTP:Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 7:46 PM
> To: m.d.t.evans@qmw.ac.uk; openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.Org; Van Liedekerke
> Franky
> Subject: Re: ldapmodify/LDIF problem
>
> I finally took the time to review this post (originally to -bugs):
> http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-bugs/9907/msg00015.html
> and my reply:
> http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-bugs/9907/msg00016.html
>
>
> At 03:45 PM 7/8/99 +0100, Martin Evans wrote:
> >Hello all,
> >
> >We may have discovered a bug with the the interpretation of the
> >changetype replace mode of the LDIF file format used by the ldapmodify
> >command line tool. And would like some advice.
> >
> >The problem is illustrated by the with following LDIF:
> >
> >dn: cn=A Person, ou=my dept, o=The College, c=GB
> >changetype: modify
> >replace: mail
> >-
> >
> >The book `LDAP - Programming Directory-Enabled Applications with
> >Lightweight Directory Access Protocol' (Howes & Smith, MacMillan
> >1997) claims that if the "replace: mail" line is not followed by any
> >attribute lines (e.g. mail: m.person@college.ac.uk). It is meant to
> >delete any mail attribute in the directory entry and not generate an
> >error if they do not exist. It does not do so - in fact it does not
> >change the entry or generate an error.
>
> That's LDAPv3 prescribed behavior. RFC2251: LDAP/Modify/replace:
> "A replace with no value will delete the entire attribute if it exists,
> and is ignored if the attribute does not exist."
>
> >Is the books interpretation of LDIF correct?
>
> For LDAPv3, yes. For LDAPv2, the behavior of a replace with no values
> is not prescibed by RFC 1777. As such, the current LDAPv2 behavior is
> acceptable.
>
> >Is there a current LDIF specification (RFC?) available
> >(preferably on the web - for free).
>
> There is a draft specification for LDIF authored by Gordon Good.
> http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-good-ldap-ldif-04.txt.
>
> However, the key here is LDAPv2 (RFC1777) vs LDAPv3 (RFC2251). LDIF
> changetype records have a one-to-one relationship with LDAP operations.
>
> >I've modified a local version of the ldapmodify.c from the 1.2.3
> >distribution to impliment this behavior as it is useful to our LDAP
> >implimentation. However, the only way I could prevent `Constraint
> >voliation' errors being returned was to replace and delete a null the
> >attribute from entry. e.g. When no replace: attribute lines have been
> >read in I call
> >
> > addmodifyop( &pmods, LDAP_MOD_REPLACE, value, NULL,0 );
> > addmodifyop( &pmods, LDAP_MOD_DELETE, value, NULL,0 );
>
> This is not appropriate. It violates the one-to-one relationship of
> "changetype: replace" with LDAP/Modify/replace operation.
>
> I committed a change to slapd (back-ldbm/bdb2) to implement the
> LDAPv3/Modify/Replace behavior when no values are provided.
>
> http://www.openldap.org/devel/cvsweb.cgi/servers/slapd/back-ldbm/modify.c.
> diff?r1=1.31&r2=1.32
>
>
> Kurt
>