On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It is not the messages that are bad but the lack of documentation.
You're right. With good documentation, the logs would be much more understandable. Also, I'm sure my lack of experience with qmail-ldap is part of the problem. > Especially if you think that error messages are bad then give some > examples -- for me most error messages are comprehensible. Generally I can understand the gist of the messages, but it's hard to catch the exact meaning. For example, "LDAP_attribute_is_not_given_but_mandatory._(#5.3.5)" comes after several such attributes, and doesn't say which one is missing, IIRC. > ... and please don't come with the 'neither by land nor by sea...' > warning. Btw. stock qmail just drops the message, do you think this > is better? I did not say that, I was just suggesting an option to have whimsical or regular messages. The fact you have a message at all is an improvement over qmail, of course. Again, I love qmail-ldap and please don't take my comments as criticism. qmail-ldap is years ahead of the competition. Ted
