[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#3639) Inconsistent access checking in back-shell?
> I think that slap.access(5) should only contain a general statement
> that support for full ACL semantics is limited to a subset of the
> backends, namely "primary" backends (HDB, BDB, LDBM) and that the
> backend documentation should be consulted for discussions on
> particular limitations. Then, in back-shell, discuss this and
> other particular limitations (such as no evaluation of "search"
> At 08:31 AM 4/8/2005, email@example.com wrote:
>>> Here's some discussion of this change in the thread:
>>OK, so now this issue bolis down to: it was intended, as (my guess) a
>>cheap replacement to creating the appropriate entry(es) and applying
>>consistent checks. So the issue now moves towards documenting this
>>from the mail archives). I'll add notes to slapd.access(5), with links
>>from the slapd-<backend>(5) man pages.
>> SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax:
SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497