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

Re: objectClasses and migrating to 2.1.x

fre, 2003-02-14 kl. 05:16 skrev Dave Horsfall:

> I see lots of examples in the documentation where entries have a full swag
> of objectClass attributes e.g.
>   sn: Jensen
>   cn: Babs Jensen
>   objectClass: top
>   objectClass: person
> Yet in our 2.0.25 directory, we merely have e.g.:
>   sn: Fred
>   cn: Fred Nerk
>   objectClass: person
> i.e. without the "top".  There are in fact many such entries without "top"
> (and I was not around when they were made).  I note that "GQ" insists upon
> having "top" etc.
> I suspect this will cause trouble when migrating to 2.1.x, right?

I have a test db running under Openldap 2.1.10 on port 9009.

I just stopped slapd on that db, slapcat'ted the db (BDB 4.1.24) to an
ldif, vi'ed the ldif to remove all the objectClass: top lines (could
have used sed), cp'ed the ldif somewhere else, mv'ed the database dir to
something else, created a new dbase dir, cp'ed th ldif to it and did
slapadd on the ldif.

No problem with the objectClass: top lines, the database just works :-)
GQ 0.7.0beta2 had no problems with it. I was able to add new top
objectClasses with GQ, but they're not necessary for things to work -
though I think all new objects should have them..

- I think ldapadd would complain about the missing objectClass, but
slapadd is very forgiving.




Tony Earnshaw

When you rob a person of his illusions,
you are robbing him of his happiness

e-post:		tonni@billy.demon.nl
www:		http://www.billy.demon.nl