Howard Chu wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 13:20:22 -0600
> From: Rich Megginson<rmeggins(a)redhat.com>
> Note - the patch does not contain the diffs for configure nor
We probably should talk about exposing the UTF8 APIs. The only reason
they were kept private is because they weren't part of the RFC1823 or
the expired C API draft, but they've been present for at least the
past 9 years.
Yeah, the utf8 API is in kind of a weird place. Some stuff is
by the OS, like utf8 <-> charset conversion (iconv), some stuff is
provided by third party libraries we already use (ICU). It's really odd
that an LDAP library should provide a utf8 API - it just seems as though
there should be a more widespread utf8 API library (ICU is very
heavyweight if that's all you're going to use it for - a sledgehammer
for a thumbtack). However, since utf8 is so integral to LDAP, having
LDAP expose a useful API would be a good thing.
re: ldif_read_record() and the public LDIF API, note our ITS#5892;
some of the function signatures here will change soon so that error
can be distinguished from EOF. (But since 2.4's APIs are supposed to
be frozen it may wait until 2.5.)
Ok. We will have to track that and be prepared
when the change occurs.
Thanks for the heads-up.