Hi, On Wednesday, 11. January 2006 10:10, Gergely Sánta wrote: > Chris Ridd wrote: > >On 11/1/06 8:21, Gergely Sánta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>--Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > >>>--On Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:29 PM +0100 Gergely Sánta > >>> > >>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>Hi! > >>>> > >>>>It seems, the problem is in my perl-experience.. I generated an > >>>>another, > >>>>bigger bug with my change, the trailing '\n'-s of lines wasn't > >>>>removed.. > >>>>So those lines wasn't equivalent at all :( > >>>> > >>>>I'm attaching a diff of my changes, which now works fine for me.. > >>> > >>>Generally the standard is to use "diff -u" not just "diff", as the > >>>default output is pretty useless to use to apply as a patch. > >>> > >>>--Quanah > >> > >>Ok, sorry, I didn't know.. Here is the "diff -u" with another little > >> change. After some googling on $INPUT_RECORD_SEPARATOR ($/), I found > >> that the difference between '$/ = undef' and '$/ = ""' is, that the > >> second one will treat two or more consecutive empty lines as a single > >> empty line. For this reason I added an additional line '$ln =~ > >> s/\n\n+/\n\n/sg;'. > >> > >>Maybe this isn't the best solution for accepting memory-files too, but > >>it works fine. I hope, it is not generating another bug to code.. Now > >>this works for buffers too: > > > >What happens if your string contains lines terminated by "\r\n" > > (DOS-style) or just "\r" (Classic MacOS-style) instead of just "\n" > > (Unix-style)? I'm not sure if LDIF allows the Classic MacOS-style, but > > I'm sure it allows the other two. > > > >I'm too lazy too look ;-) and since you've got the code in your editor... > > > >:-)) > > > >Cheers, > > > >Chris > > Yep, I had on mind that too, but I also killed too much time for this > problem :( This caused me a 2-day lag in my work, so I have no time for > experimenting with specific cases, sorry. I only know, that this solves my > problem (running on Linux and Solaris), and hope, it will help to others > with same needs too. Added a "\r" removing line, which will allow DOS-style > LDIFs. It seems to me, it not allows MacOS-style, but maybe I'm wrong.
There have been extensive changes to Nt::LDAP::LDIF which are currently in SVN. According to the output of the test program they should solve your problem. To obtain the file simply grab it from: http://svn.mutatus.co.uk/wsvn/perl-ldap/trunk/lib/Net/LDAP/LDIF.pm?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 Regards Peter -- Peter Marschall eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
