coding volunteers needed for msrpc server-side API conversion

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl at
Thu Jan 27 18:59:41 GMT 2000

> Do I see this right:
> xxx_io_q_xxx() is different from xxx_io_r_xxx(), when it
> comes to dynamic memory?

> As I understood it:
> xxx_io_q_xxx():
> 	on the client-side:
> 		just uses any memory --> no free()
> 	on the server-side:
> 		does malloc memory for received data --> malloc()
> xxx_io_r_xxx():
> 	on the client-side:
> 		does malloc memory for received data --> malloc()
> 	on the server-side:
> 		does free the memory for send data --> free()
> I don't like this asymetry.

well, the _real_ solution is to split client-side and server-side
marhalling / unmarshalling.

and i'm NOT doing that until we have some auto-generation mechanism, to
keep the two sets of marshalling code in sync.

so, for now, we massage the code into something suitable, remove the
marshalling / unmarshalling from actual _implementation_ of the functions,
and _then_ we can go for auto-gen'd marshalling / unmarshalling.

which is why it's important to use UNICODE strings not char*.

More information about the samba-technical mailing list