Still worth keeping cn=rootdse and cn=templates?

[simo]

On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 07:26 +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> simo schrieb:
> > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:24 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:03 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >>> As I move on to more strict schema checks, the cn=rootdse and
> >>> cn=templates entries in the Samdb are becoming increasingly painful.
> >>> This is because they contain attributes not present in the schema, and
> >>> don't have an objectClass.
> >>>
> >>> I'm wondering, should we move these to a different database, or somehow
> >>> ignored by the module chain?
> >>>
> >>> For the rootdse case, it would be possible to rename cn=rootdse to
> >>> @ROOTDSE, but what should we do with cn=templates?
> >> This patch implements the move to @ROOTDSE for that half of the problem.
> > 
> > What do you return as DN?
> > 
> > If I read the patch right (but it is late) you are returnig @ROOTDSE not
> > cn=rootdse 
> 
> the DN for the client is "".

correct ... it was late :)

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat Inc. <ssorce at redhat.com>