(In reply to Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] from comment #86)
> Actually, a better label would be CONFIRMED rather than NEW. That's what NEW
> really means, it does not refer to the bug's age.
I am very well aware of that; my point was to draw attention to an unacceptable quality control, record-breaking in the length of bug fix cycle. Anyway, my further testing revealed several more issues with libldap, libpam-ldap and libnss-ldap, and I decided that this software as a whole does not meet my quality requirements. Instead I am deploying sssd as LDAP client for PAM and NSS, and this is my recommendation for readers of this page.
(In reply to Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] from comment #86)
> Actually, a better label would be CONFIRMED rather than NEW. That's what NEW
> really means, it does not refer to the bug's age.
I am very well aware of that; my point was to draw attention to an unacceptable quality control, record-breaking in the length of bug fix cycle. Anyway, my further testing revealed several more issues with libldap, libpam-ldap and libnss-ldap, and I decided that this software as a whole does not meet my quality requirements. Instead I am deploying sssd as LDAP client for PAM and NSS, and this is my recommendation for readers of this page.