[LDAPsh-devel] Re: [LDAPsh-cvs] ldapsh ldapsh,1.20.8.1,1.20.8.2

[James D. <j-d...@us...>]

Hi,

In message <E19...@sc...>
on Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 03:35:27PM -0700, rco...@us... wrote:
> *** ldapsh	27 Jul 2003 07:47:25 -0000	1.20.8.1
> --- ldapsh	28 Aug 2003 22:35:25 -0000	1.20.8.2
> ***************
> *** 1591,1594 ****
> --- 1591,1596 ----
>   the search results. Any changes can be viewed using L<changes|changes> and will need to
>   be committed using L<commit|commit>.
> + BUG (TODO): If you add an attribute to an entry (so, if you add a value to an attribute
> + that hadn't previously a value), it will not be detected. We should do a two-way check.

I don't quite understand this comment. Do you have any test cases that
exhibit incorrect behaviour? The command was designed to detect new
attributes, and new values for existing attributes, without using a
two-way check. The task that is not possible is the addition of new
entries (i.e. new DNs) or removal of existing entries.

In fact...does ldapsh provide *any* commands to add or delete entries
(other than "cp")? Currently, the "add" command is for attributes (which
is needed more often than the ability to add entries, I think). Perhaps
"new" (synonym: "create") and "remove" (synonym: "rm") could be the
command names for adding and deleting entries? Plus "rename" (synonyms:
"mv" and "move") for modifying DNs?

> ! 		unless ($ldif->error() or $examined >= scalar(@$entries)) {
>   			print STDERR "Warning: some entries were absent from the edited file.\n\n";
>   		}

I think the message needs to be changed to reflect the new logic.
Perhaps "Warning: some edited entries were added, removed, or
unreadable.\n\n"?

PS. Also, I would be glad if someone could comment on my "enhanced
redirection" patch -- have I improved redirection or have I
misunderstood the pre-existing redirection features? I would like to be
able to do
    help all;|less
within the shell.