[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Case (in)sensitivity in 'by set' ACL?
> Pierangelo,
>
> I appreciate your taking the time to answer this.
>
> I was careful in my original mail not to be complaining that the
> behavior had changed. I was just asking for the clarification of what
> behavior I should expect now and in future, wrt the case I ran into.
> You've provided that, at least in part.
As a workaround to the case sensitive matching issue, one could use case
insensitive matching (ber_bvstrcasecmp() instead of bvmatch()); maybe an
"icase" style could be of help; all in all, I think sets are still
considered experimental ;)
> I'd guess that in response to your other points, enhancement suggestions
> such as syntax for defining matching rules seem like just that
> (enhancement suggestions), but documentation of what sets do _now_ would
> still be welcome. I'd rewrite your statement to say, users of sets
> should be prepared to understand and accept the behavior of the
> implementation as it is--but this discussion on normalization etc might
> be something for faq-o-matic?
I looked at the FAQ and it appears that most of the examples are now
inaccurate or wrong, as they make an incorrect use of uppercase. That has
to be fixed, I concur. I'll update those as soon as possible.
p.
Ing. Pierangelo Masarati
Responsabile Open Solution
OpenLDAP Core Team
SysNet s.n.c.
Via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA
http://www.sys-net.it
------------------------------------------
Office: +39.02.23998309
Mobile: +39.333.4963172
Email: pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
------------------------------------------