Re: OL 2.3.x, uid attribute commented out in core.schema

[Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>]

Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
> > Come to think of it, maybe slapd should accept schema redefinitions that
> > are identical to an existing definition?  Then hard-coded definitions
> > could be left in in place in the schema files, and new slapds would not
> > conflict with old schemas.  Except, I'm not quite sure if it's a feature
> > or a misfeature that one must update core.schema when slapd is
> > updated...
> >     
>
> This is what back-config does: it (silently?) discards schema
> redefinitions that are identical to existing ones.  I think this only
> occurs for internal schema (i.e. those that define the configuration
> stuff).  Maybe the same could occur for schema items that are read and
> match builtin ones, so that (for completeness) core.schema and similar can
> be complete and consistent with the related specs...
>
> I bet Howard will reply that core.schema is now replaced by core.ldif... ;)
>   
Not yet, but probably soon.... ;)

back-config collects all hard-coded schema definitions into the 
cn=schema object. It saves this object only for completeness' sake, and 
completely ignores updates to this object. There is no special treatment 
for definitions loaded from core.schema or cn=core,cn=schema - if an 
element added here has already been defined in cn=schema, it will fail.

I guess we could make an exception such that if a user-loaded definition 
is identical to a hard-coded definition, it is silently ignored. If 
that's really the desired behavior, someone should file an enhancement 
request.

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