TALLOC_CTX to ldb_search()?

[tridge at samba.org]

Volker,

 > To me this looks a bit unnatural and error-prone. Having an
 > explicit mem_ctx makes it easier to hook it to a
 > procedure-local temporary ctx and have it automatically
 > freed.

If we'd been designing it now, I would have chosen to have a mem_ctx
argument. The question really is whether it's worth changing it now.

One option is to leave the current function, and add a new one which
also gives us a printf style argument for the expression. The most
common pattern of usage seems to be like this:

	expr = talloc_asprintf(ldb, "(&(gidNumber=%u)(objectClass=groupMap))", 
			       (unsigned)gid);
	if (expr == NULL) goto failed;
	ret = ldb_search(ldb, NULL, LDB_SCOPE_SUBTREE, expr, NULL, &res);
	talloc_steal(expr, res);

if we had a varargs printf style argument to a function like
ldb_search which also put the result on a specified talloc context
then this would become one function, and I think that would be the
most friendly for programmers.

But what to call the function?? :-)

Cheers, Tridge