[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Pierangelo Masarati writes: >> I think ITS#5326 is related. Namely, write operations (add, rename) >> should always rebuild the (new)DN hierarchically from the tree. > > I'm not sure what exactly the problem is, if any:-) Syncrepl itself > needs to handle databases that are not that nice: We can't require > that of back-perl, nor back-ldap which accesses a non-OpenLDAP server > (if that makes any sense). And syncrepl + rwm, maybe? Also syncrepl > is an RFC (4533) so it should handle non-OpenLDAP peers.
Syncrepl of course *handles* all of those cases. The only issue here is that our tests expect the results to be in a specific order, which is obviously an invalid requirement in the grand scheme of things. > Still, if it keeps OpenLDAP-on-OpenLDAP clean, that's a plus. > Unless we want back-ldif to be different just to test that syncrepl > handles different backends. Might also make a test which replicates > between different backends - e.g. $BACKEND and back-ldif. The syncrepl rename-detection can be improved - we can compare the normalized parent DN, separately from the un-normalized RDN. This would eliminate a false detection of a move/rename solely due to superior RDNs being mismatched. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
