Re: createTimestamp?

[Bing D. <Bi...@ci...>]

Thanks all.  Ok, I have given up using as_struct.
  
I saw 'createtimestamp' finally by using $ldcon->search(base =>
$BASEDN, scope => 'sub', filter => $filter,attrs=>
["createtimestamp"],typesonly => 0) :).

A new question:

I used to use
$ldcon->search(base...,scope...,filter...,attrs=>[],typesonly...) to 
retrieve values of all attributes without specificly listing all
attributes' names in @attrs (e.g. @attrs = ('cn', 'phone','email')), and
then use attrs=>@attrs in 'search'.   By doing this, I do not need to
change my script whenever new attributes are added in.   

But now I have to explicitly specify operational attributes in
attrs=>[] because I want them.   So is there a way to represent all
other regular attributes still without listing them explicitly?

Thanks,

Bing

>>> Chris Ridd <chr...@me...> 08/10/00 02:34AM >>>
Mark Wilcox <mew...@un...> wrote:
> Chris Ridd (who works for Messanging Direct) will be the best one to
> answer this. But he's leaving on a trip, so I don't know if he's
online
> right now.

Still here...

> Have you verified that the attribute is actually there (ie. have you
> dumped it out with ldapsearch or MD's version of db2ldif?)
> 
> Mark

The default access controls we have in our directory will only permit
the
DSA manager - which Bing is binding as, so that's OK - read access to
createTimestamp.

As others have pointed out, createTimestamp is an operational
attribute, so
will only be returned over LDAP when the client explicitly asks for
it.

So I suspect the problem is either that you aren't explicitly
specifying in
the search operation that you want the createTimestamp back, or the
way
you're accessing the entries back via as_struct is wrong.

To check the attributes are really coming back over the network, set
debug
=> 12 when you create the LDAP object. You will then get a whole load
of
output to stderr which is a dump of the raw protocol. Hopefully you'll
see
the createTimestamps being returned.

I haven't used as_struct myself, so can't comment on that part.

Cheers,

Chris