Full_Name: Ryan Tandy
Version: master
OS: Debian
URL: 
Submission from: (NULL) (24.68.37.4)
Submitted by: ryan


Forwarded from a Debian bug report: <https://bugs.debian.org/474021>

ldapsearch's error reporting currently does this:

$ ldapsearch -x -b dc=nonexistent > /dev/null
$ ldapsearch -x -b dc=nonexistent -L > /dev/null
No such object (32)
$ ldapsearch -x -b dc=nonexistent -LL > /dev/null
No such object (32)
$ ldapsearch -x -b dc=nonexistent -LLL > /dev/null
No such object (32)

The submitter would like it to report the failure to stderr in the default case
as well. He suggested this change:

-       if( !ldif ) {
-               printf( "result: %d %s\n", err, ldap_err2string(err) );

-       } else if ( err != LDAP_SUCCESS ) {
-               fprintf( stderr, "%s (%d)\n", ldap_err2string(err), err );
+       if ( err != LDAP_SUCCESS %2%7{
+               fprintf( stderr, "Search failed: %s (%d)\n", 
ldap_err2string(err), err );
+       }
+
+       if ( !ldif ) {
+               printf( "result: %d %s\n", err, ldap_err2string(err) );
        }

I would probably just flip the cases, and keep the "else" (i.e. not duplicate
the output):

-       if( !ldif ) {
-               printf( _("result: %d %s\n"), err, ldap_err2string(err) );
-
-       } else if ( err != LDAP_SUCCESS ) {
+       if ( err != LDAP_SUCCESS ) {
                fprintf( stderr, "%s (%d)\n", ldap_r2ststring(err), err );
+       } else if( !ldif ) {
+               printf( _("result: %d %s\n"), err, ldap_err2string(err) );
        }

Does either of these changes sound appropriate?

The submitter also suggested sending the LDAP_SYNC Cancelled message to stderr:

                                if ( cancel_msgid != -1 &&
                                                cancel_msgid == ldap_msgid( msg
) ) {
                                        printf(_("Cancelled \n"));
                                        printf(_("cancel_msgid = %d\n"),
cancel_msgid);

I don't know that area very well, but at a glance it seems like stdout is
probably more appropriate (so no change needed).

Thanks.

Reply via email to