At 12:32 PM 9/29/2005, Mike Jackson wrote: > Any chance of getting a "structuralchecking off" feature in slapd.conf or > cn=config, so that people don't have to resort to hacking the source code?
Certainly after someone hacks the source code to well support such a feature, they could submit their hack for consideration for inclusion in OpenLDAP Software. But that hasn't happened (at least not yet). >It's nice to try to get people to do the right thing with sensible default >values, but if somebody wants to disregard structural integrity for whatever >reason, then you should not assume that you know better than them and prevent >them from doing it. I think you might be making assumptions as to why the feature is not currently supported. There are numerous features of slapd(8) which experts advise should be avoided. This feature was axed because it was broken and conflicted with our implementation of with other features, in particular, it conflicted with the DIT content rules code. Maybe someone will design a new feature to disable schema constraints that doesn't conflict with our support for standardized features, implement it well, and contribute it. Until then... I do note that there was some developers list discussions in this area. Anyone considering taking this one would likely want to review these discussions. > BTW, would including the extensibleObject class make the server disregard > structural integrity checking for that particular object? All objects are subject to schema checks. If the object belongs to the extensible object, that object is allowed to have values of any (user) attribute type. The presence or absence of extensible object, or any other auxiliary class, has no impact on the structural object class of the object. Kurt
