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

Re: olcAccess/olcLimits modifications

Hi,

That is correct. Also if you leave out the {#} entry, the value will be added at the end of any current values.

I learnt most of these details from the zytrax book on openldap, as it contained non-trivial examples. This section:http://www.zytrax.com/books/ldap/ch6/slapd-config.html#use-security describes the {} functionality.

Regards
/Cole

On 10 March 2016 at 22:56, PenguinWhispererThe . <th3penguinwhisperer@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's completely missing the point of these ordering prefixes.
I honestly don't see a lot of mentioning about this except for replace and deletes. Maybe it was my use of keywords.

I did some tries but I failed. I couldn't find any clear examples on doing what I wanted. I mostly saw add/replace options but without the {} ordering. I'm very new to this.

I'll try again tomorrow.

So from the IETF I understand I should be using something like this to insert a row at the beginning:
dn: olcDatabase={2}mdb,cn=config
changetype:modify
add: olcAccess
       olcAccess: {0}full accessrule


Thanks for your responses! Greatly appreciated!

0 viruses found. www.avast.com

2016-03-10 18:39 GMT+01:00 Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:18:01PM +0100, PenguinWhispererThe . wrote:
I've been looking for examples for inserting in between but couldn't find
any. Maybe I use the wrong keywords in our favorite search engine.

Is this deleting and adding or replacing the way to go to make these
changes?
Are there alternatives?

 You can add a new entry with the index {n} specified. Existing entries will be re-numbered (their index incremented) to make room.