[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Resolving groups (neophyte question)



Hi,
try a filter like this
(uniquemember=uid=bryan*)


btw inetOrgperson is a standard object class.

Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip A. Prindeville <philipp@mirapoint.com>
To: openldap-general@OpenLDAP.org <openldap-general@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 6:19 PM
Subject: Resolving groups (neophyte question)


>I have a question regarding resolving lists (groups).  If I have a group
>that
>looks like:
>
>% ldapsearch -v -L -s sub -b 'o=mirapoint.com' -h ugh "cn=Software
>Engineers"
>ldap_init( ugh, 0 )
>filter pattern: cn=Software Engineers
>returning: ALL
>filter is: (cn=Software Engineers)
>dn: cn=Software Engineers,ou=Groups, o=mirapoint.com
>objectclass: top
>objectclass: groupofuniquenames
>cn: Software Engineers
>creatorsname:
>uid=admin,ou=Administrators,ou=TopologyManagement,o=NetscapeRoot
>createtimestamp: 19990603220646Z
>uniquemember: uid=bryan,ou=People, o=mirapoint.com
>uniquemember: uid=philipp,ou=People, o=mirapoint.com
>uniquemember: uid=btaylor,ou=People, o=mirapoint.com
>description: Hackers
>modifiersname:
>uid=admin,ou=Administrators,ou=TopologyManagement,o=NetscapeRoot
>modifytimestamp: 19990603220951Z
>1 matches
>
>and I try to search on the returned DNs in the uniquemember attribute
>field,
>then the search always fails:
>
>ldapsearch -v -L -s sub -D 'cn=Directory Manager' -w 'directory' -b
>'o=mirapoint.com' -h ugh 'uid=bryan,ou=People,o=mirapoint.com'
>putois% ldapsearch -v -L -s sub  -b 'o=mirapoint.com' -h ugh
>'uid=bryan,ou=People, o=mirapoint.com'
>ldap_init( ugh, 0 )
>filter pattern: uid=bryan,ou=People,o=mirapoint.com
>returning: ALL
>filter is: (uid=bryan,ou=People,o=mirapoint.com)
>0 matches
>
>But if I search on just "uid=bryan" then it finds the person record just
>
>fine.  Actually it's an inetOrgPerson since I'm using the Netscape
>directory server.
>
>No doubt I'm missing something obvious.  I just don't know what.
>
>Someone want to help me out here?
>
>Thanks,
>
>-Philip
>
>
>
>