[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: >= (greater or equal) and <= (lower or equal) operators in
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:05:27AM +0100, Greg Matthews wrote:
>> Is there no call for this sort of matching in filters then? Doesnt
>> anyone need to:
>> ldapsearch -x "(uidnumber>=1000)"
> I need to, but I can't. The RFC2307 schema misses that, and my questions
> why remain unanswered in the nss_ldap mailing list.
> What I'm doing for now is listing all uidnumbers and parsing the output
> a shell script (!).
I think the standard is missing it on purpose, because regular usage
doesn't need anything but exact match. Note that uidNumber to uid mapping
only needs to use uidNumber as a key for exact filters. If you want to
use it for a different purpose, you should choose a different
attributeType, or design your own.
>> Is it considered breaking standard schema to add ORDERING rules into
> I would love to and I'm about to throw in the towel and "break" this
> schema by adding this (and other) rules. A broken or difficult standard is
> no use.
Then just design your own, or propose a draft for standard emendation, but
don't hijack others, or you'll run into interoperability problems, sooner
SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497