possible bug in ldb ?

[tridge at samba.org]

Simo,

 > show we just use an int for return codes or do you think somethin like
 > NT status codes is better? I would go for normal integers as that keeps
 > ldb easier for other to be reused.

I don't want the API to move too far away from the ldap API. It
doesn't need to be identical to ldap, but I want it to be easy to
understand for people used to ldap.

So I guess this means we should define LDB_SUCCESS,
LDB_OPERATIONS_ERROR, LDB_INVALID_DN_SYNTAX etc as an enum with fixed
values, and return that. 

I certainly don't think NTSTATUS values would be appropriate. It would
be too artificial to try to make up a sane mapping between the errors
ldb generates and NT status codes.

After we start filling in the error code handling, we then need to
correctly map them into the ldap server, so other ldap clients get the
right error.

Cheers, Tridge