Re: ITS#8286 continued

[Quanah Gibson-Mount]

--On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 7:28 PM +0100 Howard Chu  wrote:


for the matching rule.  Anyone have an opinion for caseIgnoreMatch
being better?


Looks like the values are schema keywords, they should be caseIgnoreMatch.


Great, thanks!

--Quanah

--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:

Re: ITS#8286 continued

[Howard Chu]

Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> I found a few stray items that still need matching rules.  All were trivially 
> straight forward except one for slapo-chain:
> 
>    { "chain-chaining", "args",
>    2, 4, 0, ARG_MAGIC|ARG_BERVAL|CH_CHAINING, chain_cf_gen,
>    "( OLcfgOvAt:3.1 NAME 'olcChainingBehavior' "
>    "DESC 'Chaining behavior control parameters 
> (draft-sermersheim-ldap-chaining)' "
>    "SYNTAX OMsDirectoryString SINGLE-VALUE )", NULL, NULL },
> 
> At the moment, based on the man page description, I was thinking:
> 
>   "EQUALITY caseExactMatch "
> 
> for the matching rule.  Anyone have an opinion for caseIgnoreMatch being 
> better?

Looks like the values are schema keywords, they should be caseIgnoreMatch.
> 
> Thanks,
> Quanah
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Product Architect
> Symas Corporation
> Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.   http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/