I have a weee problemette with ADMINReqMoveComplete:
I’m moving a user from “Testing Testing001/Acme” (or “CN=testing testing001/O=Acme” for you canonical guys) to a new certifier “/Test”.
This works fine under v5 - ADMINReqMoveUserInHier and ADMINReqMoveComplete successfully translate his name to:
CN=Testing Testing001/O=Test
However, using v6 (v6.0.1 on solaris, C-API v6), I get:
CN=Testing Testing001/OU=O=TEST/O=Test
Giving the rather horrible abbreviated form:
Testing Testing001/O=TEST/Test
Which is a bit odd. Increasingly oddly, the certifier context correctly returns the name of the certifier as “O=TEST” (which is what I use for AdminReqMoveComplete, and is the new certifier name in AdminReqMoveUserInHier…), and my ADMINReqParams are basically all set to NULL. No alternale names, OU’s, etc, etc.
Has anyone trodden down this path yet ?
[Okay - this can now all be done in Lotusscript, and this is one of the areas in which I’ll run to if necessary… However, it would be nice to fix this in the meantime…]
—* Bill
Subject: could be a problem with new lenght of strucutres. make sure to allocate the right size with right padding… this stuff is a little more odd on Unix 
Subject: mmmmmmm…
Wilst still interested in a response to this question, I managed to recode a user move, user rename, user delete and create cluster mailfile set of transactions in R6 in a few hours!
So - big credit to the member within IRIS who coded these. Nice one!
Couple of questions though -
Firstly - error handling… What happens if any of these particular requests fail, and dont make it into AdminP ? How is this trapped ? Does it throw a conventional Lotusscript error?
Secondly - how does one tell the adminProcess object where admin4.nsf is (assuming we’re running multi-domains, etc, etc) ? Will this come along in newer versions ?
Thanks,
—* Bill
Subject: if there is a script way don’t use c-api this works cross platform and needs no special recodeding later – and is fully supported
C-API from script (if I understood your right) is double hard on Unix. If you can aovid it you made a choice …
– Daniel
Subject: Agree…
However, some customers out there still havent made the no-brainer jump to ND6…
And yes - LSX in Unix… Well, I’ve lost a lot of hair on that issue… !
—* Bill