Pierangelo Masarati writes: > I don't know how useful it would be to have back-ldif directly implement > compare, as soon as one only uses it for back-config and not for a real > storage with stacked overlays (however I note that back-config needs at > least to nicely interoperate with one overlay: slapo-syncprov).
Syncprov does use compare, and back-config doesn't provide it. I don't know if that's a problem. I forgot, back-config doesn't fall back to back-ldif for reads. So I guess it's just as well to leave back-ldif as it is. -- Hallvard
