Issue #80 has been updated by Cl?ment Oudot.

I propose this patch:

<pre>
Index: BeanComparator.java
===================================================================
--- BeanComparator.java (revision 251)
+++ BeanComparator.java (working copy)
@@ -106,6 +106,7 @@
                return JndiModificationType.ADD_ENTRY;
        } else { /* srcBean != null && destBean != null */
                if (itmBean.getDistinguishName() == null
+                               || 
((Boolean)syncOptions.getModrdnCondition().equalsIgnoreCase("false"))
                                || 
destBean.getDistinguishName().compareToIgnoreCase(itmBean.getDistinguishName()) 
== 0) {
                        return JndiModificationType.MODIFY_ENTRY;
                } else {

</pre>

It's ugly but seems to work.

Your opinion on this?
----------------------------------------
Feature #80: Force LSC to apply modifications if modrdn is false
http://tools.lsc-project.org/issues/show/80

Author: Cl?ment Oudot
Status: New
Priority: Normal
Assigned to: 
Category: 
Target version: 


Hello,

I use a connector in "update-only" mode. So I set to false create/delete/modrdn 
conditions.

I do not use "dn" rule because I cannot set this rule (I don't know how the 
destination entries will be named). I  just want to update an attribute in the 
destination entry (I know how to mach source entry and destination entry with a 
filter).

LSC see that my destination entry DN is not correct, so it tries to make a 
modrdn. My modrdn is false so it does nothing. But it does not do the update! 
Indeed, LSC is programmed to skip update i modrdn is required. But if modrdn 
condition is false, update should be made.

Are you agree?


-- 
You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, 
or are involved in it.
To change your notification preferences, please click here: 
http://tools.lsc-project.org/my/account
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.lsc-project.org/pipermail/lsc-dev/attachments/20090615/90ffc359/attachment.htm>

Reply via email to