perl-ldap-dev

Minimum supported perl version

[Graham B. <gb...@po...>]

I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004

So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03

Graham.

ldap_error_name bug?

[Stefan P. <st...@ra...>]

Hello,

I just upgraded to Net::LDAP 0.25 (from 0.17)
now there seems to be a problem with ldap_error_name in Util.pm

when i do
print ldap_error_name(0);
 there is the output:
LDAP error code 0(0x00)

which should only come, when the error code is not available.

but when i paste the old ldap_error_name function into the new Util.pm
and do
print ldap_error_name(0);
then there come the output
LDAP_SUCCESS

correctly

Is this a bug, or what am i doing wrong?

cheers,
stefan


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: per...@li...
[mailto:per...@li...]Im Auftrag von Graham
Barr
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2002 07:25
An: LDAP Mailing List
Betreff: Minimum supported perl version


I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004

So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03

Graham.

Re: ldap_error_name bug?

[Graham B. <gb...@po...>]

It works fine for me here. What version of perl are you using and on
what OS ?

Graham.

On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:39:23AM +0100, Stefan Poschenrieder wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just upgraded to Net::LDAP 0.25 (from 0.17)
> now there seems to be a problem with ldap_error_name in Util.pm
> 
> when i do
> print ldap_error_name(0);
>  there is the output:
> LDAP error code 0(0x00)
> 
> which should only come, when the error code is not available.
> 
> but when i paste the old ldap_error_name function into the new Util.pm
> and do
> print ldap_error_name(0);
> then there come the output
> LDAP_SUCCESS
> 
> correctly
> 
> Is this a bug, or what am i doing wrong?
> 
> cheers,
> stefan
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: per...@li...
> [mailto:per...@li...]Im Auftrag von Graham
> Barr
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2002 07:25
> An: LDAP Mailing List
> Betreff: Minimum supported perl version
> 
> 
> I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
> support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004
> 
> So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
> next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03
> 
> Graham.
> 
> 

AW: ldap_error_name bug?

[Stefan P. <st...@ra...>]

Perl 5.6.1 build 626
windows Nt server 4.0

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: per...@li...
[mailto:per...@li...]Im Auftrag von Graham
Barr
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2002 10:58
An: Stefan Poschenrieder
Cc: LDAP Mailing List
Betreff: Re: ldap_error_name bug?


It works fine for me here. What version of perl are you using and on
what OS ?

Graham.

On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:39:23AM +0100, Stefan Poschenrieder wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just upgraded to Net::LDAP 0.25 (from 0.17)
> now there seems to be a problem with ldap_error_name in Util.pm
>
> when i do
> print ldap_error_name(0);
>  there is the output:
> LDAP error code 0(0x00)
>
> which should only come, when the error code is not available.
>
> but when i paste the old ldap_error_name function into the new Util.pm
> and do
> print ldap_error_name(0);
> then there come the output
> LDAP_SUCCESS
>
> correctly
>
> Is this a bug, or what am i doing wrong?
>
> cheers,
> stefan
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: per...@li...
> [mailto:per...@li...]Im Auftrag von Graham
> Barr
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2002 07:25
> An: LDAP Mailing List
> Betreff: Minimum supported perl version
>
>
> I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
> support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004
>
> So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
> next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03
>
> Graham.
>
>

Re: Minimum supported perl version

[Chris R. <chr...@me...>]

Graham Barr <gb...@po...> wrote:
> I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
> support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004
> 
> So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
> next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03
> 
> Graham.
> 

What are the differences between these 2 versions, and how do they affect
Net::LDAP?

Cheers,

Chris

Re: Minimum supported perl version

[Graham B. <gb...@po...>]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:40:05AM -0000, Chris Ridd wrote:
> Graham Barr <gb...@po...> wrote:
> > I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
> > support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004
> > 
> > So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
> > next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03
> > 
> > Graham.
> > 
> 
> What are the differences between these 2 versions, and how do they affect
> Net::LDAP?

Its mainly just syntax. I could easily make most of Net::LDAP be OK.
But Filter is using a regexp that 5.004 does not like (but we may find
a different solution)

But also more and more of the modules we depend on are moving on.
The DSML module I am working on uses XML::SAX, which will not work
with 5.004

So its getting to the point where we say "we support 5.004, but if you
want to do this, that or the other your mileage will vary"

Graham.

Re: Minimum supported perl version

[Chris R. <chr...@me...>]

Graham Barr <gb...@po...> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:40:05AM -0000, Chris Ridd wrote:
>> Graham Barr <gb...@po...> wrote:
>> > I think it is time that we stopped holding ourselves back and drop
>> > support for running Net::LDAP under perl5.004
>> > 
>> > So unless someone speaks up with a very compelling argument, the
>> > next release of perl-ldap will require at least perl5.005_03
>> > 
>> > Graham.
>> > 
>> 
>> What are the differences between these 2 versions, and how do they affect
>> Net::LDAP?
> 
> Its mainly just syntax. I could easily make most of Net::LDAP be OK.
> But Filter is using a regexp that 5.004 does not like (but we may find
> a different solution)
> 
> But also more and more of the modules we depend on are moving on.
> The DSML module I am working on uses XML::SAX, which will not work
> with 5.004
> 
> So its getting to the point where we say "we support 5.004, but if you
> want to do this, that or the other your mileage will vary"

OK, that makes sense. I'd be concerned if we were suddenly going to require
5.6 or something.

You've got my vote for requiring 5.005_03.

Cheers,

Chris