Re: Continuous mode (ldapmodify -c) not working

[Ori Bani <oribani@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
> Ori Bani wrote:
>> Thanks so much for the reply.  Can you please clarify --
>>
>>>> Am I doing something wrong?  Here is an example:
>>>>
>>>> $ ldapmodify -c -x -D 'cn=config' -W
>>>> Enter LDAP Password: <password>
>>>> dn: olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config
>>>> changetype: modify
>>>> delete: olcSizeLimit
>>>> -
>>>> modifying entry "olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config"
>>>> ldap_modify: No such attribute (16)
>>>>         additional info: modify/delete: olcSizeLimit: no such attribute
>>>
>>> Option -c does not mean that you can override any server-side checking. It
>>> just means that processing the LDIF input is continued.
>>>
>>> In your case entry olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config simply does not contain
>>> attribute 'olcSizeLimit' which is what the error message says.
>>
>> I'd be fine if that was the case, but I'm not seeing it work as you
>> suggest (processing does NOT continue).  Surely I'm doing something
>> wrong.  Here is an example of a situation where the subsequest action
>> in the LDIF is ignored after the error:
>>
>> $ ldapmodify -c -x -D 'cn=config' -W
>> Enter LDAP Password: <password>
>> dn: olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config
>> changetype: modify
>> delete: olcSizeLimit
>> -
>> add: olcSizeLimit
>> olcSizeLimit: 250
>> -
>> modifying entry "olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config"
>> ldap_modify: No such attribute (16)
>>         additional info: modify/delete: olcSizeLimit: no such attribute
>
> Why don't you just use this if attribute 'olcSizeLimit' is not in
> the entry yet?

Part of an automated system.  If -c worked as the man page states,
this should not be a problem.

> dn: olcDatabase={0}config,cn=config
> changetype: modify
> add: olcSizeLimit
> olcSizeLimit: 250
> -
>
> After all -c works as expected: If you have more than one records in your LDIF
> file it will try to process the next one.

I just showed you that this is not true in my case.  Why are you
saying this?  What am I not understanding?