Ori Bani wrote:
> 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.
Then fix that system.
> If -c worked as the man page states,
> this should not be a problem.
You misinterpret completely what the man page says about option -c.
>> 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?
Read RFC 2849 about how LDIF is structured. And then understand that your LDIF
change record leads to a *single* modify request which obviously fails because
of 'olcSizeLimit' not existing (which is a feature not a bug).
Ciao, Michael.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature