Re: Subordinate ACL question

[Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it>]

Luke Howard wrote:

> > is an error; I've never tried anything like that, so I don't know if slapd
> > happily ignores it or whatever it does in response, but the man page
> > clearly states that the <control> field {break|continue|stop} is optional,
> > but the <access> field [self]{<level>|<priv>} is mandatory.  I assume
> > something like "+0" (i.e. permissions are not altered) is implied, but I
> > need to check the code and see if this should become a de-facto defalt
> > behavior or it should be explicitly enforced.
> >    
>
> So
>
> 	by * +0 break
>
> would be more correct?
>
> Looking at aclparse.c it appears that "break" is supported both before
> and after <who>.
>  
Then I guess the docs need be updated, or the code modified.

Ciao, p.





   SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497