[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: TLS dumping core

[I meant to send to to the list, but mistakenly only sent it
to Brian.  Corrected here... with some minor revisions.]

At 01:54 AM 10/17/2005, B.Candler@pobox.com wrote:
>On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 07:40:57PM -0700, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>> At 10:42 AM 10/16/2005, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>> >Suggest you file an ITS will appropriate details (including
>> >back traces)...  I have not yet attempted to reproduce this
>> >yet, simply don't have time at the moment (hence the
>> >suggestion).
>> I believe this to now be fixed...  you need not file
>> an ITS unless you believe otherwise...
>No, the problem is still there. The simplest way to replicate is:
>(1) /opt/openldap/libexec/slapd -h ldaps:/// -d 255
>(2) telnet localhost 636
>(3) "^] close" to disconnect.

I actually had duplicated the (or at least similar) problem and
confirmed the fix resolved that problem prior to committing a fix.

>Just in case I am doing something stupid, I was hoping that some OpenLDAP
>developer would take a few seconds to try to replicate it themselves, and
>then they can raise an ITS with more authority than one from me, or else
>point me in the right direction.

Until you actually file an ITS, you shouldn't hope that anyone
take the time to investigate the issue.  Any pre-report discussion
would only be help the discover of the problem determine whether
it be reasonable due to a bug in OpenLDAP Software.

I note as well that "OpenLDAP developers" (e.g.,
members of the engineering team" haven't "more authority"
to raise issues than anyone else.   I also note that it
important for the discover of the problem to report problems
so as they can be contacted to test any fix that might
eventually be committed.  You shouldn't rely on others duplicating
and fixing the precise problem you are experiencing as they may
have only discovered a similar problem and fixed that.
For instance, if I had filed an ITS yesterday, I would have
closed it after committing my fix as I fixed the problem
I would have reported.  Now, if you had filed the ITS, your
note that it didn't fix the problem you were having would keep
the ITS open.

>I thought that was the point of a mailing list - to discuss.

To discuss development of OpenLDAP Software.

The bugs list is actually the list to discuss bugs in OpenLDAP
Software (though discussions pertaining to development of bug
fixes, or bugs in newly developed codes, etc. may be appropriate

But we only track bug reports and their resolution through the
issue tracking system.

I also note that a bug not reported may be assumed not
significant enough to warrant immediate investigation.  That
is, inaction begets inaction.

>Stuffing a problem into ITS seems to be a very one-way mechanism:

No.  Every problem report is forwarded to the -bugs list for

>"You have entered the system as a guest user. While you can browse existing
>reports and submit new reports, you will not be able to modify any existing
>report or access non-guest features"

This refers to what you can do via the web interface.  However, you
can submit follow-up to the bug report by email as indicated
in the message one gets when they submit a report.  I suggest
you go back and read that message (you have recently filed
a couple of ITSs, so you should have gotten a couple of these