On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 20:19 +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
> Thus, the the is a single value, but spread across multiple lines?
Yes.
> Can you show an example result from the corresponding ldapsearch
> invocation? Probably using `ldapsearch -o ldif-wrap=no` to avoid
> misleading massage of the message?
Fails:
msExchBlockedSendersHash::
jxsmAM7bgwpOSNkMSMyJDXS4yRDDqJoTrrLEExefBRyjEWIhuko6KRYF/CmlUCwyQXvtN0t/ojmZEd871WkpQXnet0ZqUphI3WGhSupOdFYzvh1lSDbkacsbfG4MxoJu0bixcFsJmXG5ODFy+pcBdL8gwnn9liSGhE5djlInr5Au2/iQgQ6YkW/kGZLqEAaXTmIllz3CLpd82Led9D7QnR7zuZ8ohiqry7CsrPOhs6zbtbyszMWjsk54u7TTcnG8n2+gvh38Z8cg84DTUoi53m82Rd/cBi/jG9hg49e/U+UPq23lcalc6h8ymvMI2sH9
Works:
msExchBlockedSendersHash:: JidEA3+4BwoRuL0KBtXIIWTidTRi8ulK2EqAwA==
Also works:
msExchBlockedSendersHash:: HGNWCMrpNiGfbEMlws/YKkPhhC
+udkgzZme6PCEUHUd0AmtHia4HUtv8GFIqAiRTVdkqXl9YcmTYg
+NpVFsFdT8ixIWpTfOGi8kUmY8ikpp1wTOi5PHipd2SaKvoIN65YOYb3iCJE99
+Izvoi5mP/w==
> Can you reproduce the behaviour with a
> exim -be '${lookup {ldap://…}}'
Yes, with 100% reliability - I'm just not quite sure where the cutoff is
yet. I thought 256 chars but it seems lower than that, with the caveat
that I'm not yet sure whether it's the encoded or decoded character
count that is the problem. Or, indeed, if it's a character count that's
the problem at all!
Graeme
