Obviously, I've tried ldapmodify and, as expected, it ends with an error, no segfaults. However, I just tried ldapmodrdn -r -h localhost -p 389 -D "cn=xxx" -W "cn=00000000000002000007,ou=1,ou=Users,ou=132252,ou=Tenants,dc=CIDS" "cn=00000000000002000007" -s "ou=DeletedUsers,ou=132245,ou=Tenants,DC=CIDS" where the target superior entry doesn't exist, and, to my surprise, this leads to the same segfault... I don't think it's normal, isn't it? BTW, we've opened a case at Red Hat (we have RHDS subscription) regarding this issue, so I suppose we have top stop discussing this problem here, right? Regards, Vladimir. On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 09:58 -0800, Noriko Hosoi wrote: > (2012/11/13 05:22), Rich Megginson wrote: > > On 11/13/2012 03:30 AM, Vladimir Elisseev wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> First of all I'd say that most likely this segfault is a result of > >> badly designed application and/or bad coding. The segfault occurs while > >> this application tries to move an entry to non-existing LDAP container. > >> Unfortunately I don't have access to the source code of this app. The > >> segfault is below with backtrace from dgb: > >> > >> ns-slapd[4983]: segfault at 18 ip 00007f2ed4a60759 sp > >> 00007f2e955e13e0 error 4 in libback-ldbm.so[7f2ed4a34000+8f000] > >> > >> > >> #0 0x00007f2ed4a60759 in id2entry_add_ext () from > >> /usr/lib64/dirsrv/plugins/libback-ldbm.so > >> #1 0x00007f2ed4a8a34c in modify_update_all () from > >> /usr/lib64/dirsrv/plugins/libback-ldbm.so > >> #2 0x00007f2ed4a8eb4f in ldbm_back_modrdn () from > >> /usr/lib64/dirsrv/plugins/libback-ldbm.so > >> #3 0x00007f2eddbecdaa in ?? () from /usr/lib64/dirsrv/libslapd.so.0 > >> #4 0x00007f2eddbed66c in do_modrdn () from > >> /usr/lib64/dirsrv/libslapd.so.0 > >> #5 0x0000000000413904 in ?? () > >> #6 0x00007f2edc0369e3 in ?? () from /lib64/libnspr4.so > >> #7 0x00007f2edb9d9851 in start_thread () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0 > >> #8 0x00007f2edb72711d in clone () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > >> > >> I'd appreciate any thoughts regarding what kind of (bad) things this > >> application is doing. Is it possible to have a kind of protection in > >> this case on directory server? > > rpm -q 389-ds-base > > Can you provide a full stack trace based on the instructions at > > http://port389.org/wiki/FAQ#Debugging_Crashes ? > Also, can we have the modrdn operation you executed? Command line > history and/or the snippet of the access log would be helpful. > > I tried these modrdns, but it failed with the expected errors... And the > server is up and running after that. > $ ldapmodify ... > dn: cn=HR,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com > changetype: modrdn > newrdn: cn=HR > deleteoldrdn: 1 > newsuperior: ou=bogus,dc=example,dc=com > > modifying rdn of entry "cn=HR,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com" > ldap_rename: No such object (32) > matched DN: dc=example,dc=com > > $ ldapmodify ... > dn: cn=HR,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com > changetype: modrdn > newrdn: cn=HR > deleteoldrdn: 1 > newsuperior: o=bogus.com > > modifying rdn of entry "cn=HR,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com" > ldap_rename: Operation affects multiple DSAs (71) > additional info: Cannot move entries across backends > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users -- 389 users mailing list 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
