Article:		Demystifying LDAP Data
Subject:		Inheritance Order on ldif
Date:		2007-02-01 08:32:48
From:		0_o
Response to: Inheritance Order on ldif
On the last line of page 1 of this article, I state: "I've done it starting with top and listing the descendants in order, like a family tree. You're free to list them out of order if you like." That is not to say that I condone listing things out of order - I don't. However, I'm unsure that there is a product that will enforce this ordering of objectclasses in a given entry. If the product you're using does not enforce the ordering, then the answer to your question "aren't these the same?" is "yes". If your product *does* care about the ordering, then the answer is "no", and you'll have to reorde the objectclass attributes of the entry. If you're unsure how to do that, re-read this article, and you should be able to figure it out. If not, list your questions here! :-)

Showing messages 1 through 3 of 3.

• Inheritance Order on ldif
  2007-02-01 11:46:47  fredcwbr [View]
  
  
  Gotcha for the objectclass ordering, Tks, and what about the o: after the dn: or after the objectclass tree, is it the same "doesn't make a difference" if the ldapadd uderstands it?
• Inheritance Order on ldif
  2007-02-01 11:57:28  Brian K. Jones | [View]
  
  
  it's never made a difference on any system I've seen. I'm just anal retentive that way and like things to be orderly. Truthfully, you'll find that no matter how much of a stickler you are, attributes *can* be returned by the server in more or less random order anyway, so... go figure.
  
  ;-)
  
  
• Inheritance Order on ldif
  2007-02-01 12:24:22  fredcwbr [View]
  
  
  Tks for the prompt response. It really did the job and BTW exquisite article. 8-)