[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.


Ing. Pierangelo Masarati
Responsabile Open Solution
OpenLDAP Core Team

SysNet s.n.c.
Via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA
Office:   +39.02.23998309          
Mobile:   +39.333.4963172
Email:    pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it