[PATCH] Samba 4 fix for bugzilla #4958

[simo]

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 03:17 -0500, Andrew Kroeger wrote:
> I don't have an answer to that.  My proposed patch was intended to
> address one case where Samba 4 behavior differed from Windows
> behavior,
> and make that as localized as possible to address the issue.  Given
> that
> the current ltdb_rename() code in SVN uses ltdb_add_internal() and
> ltdb_delete_internal() to accomplish the rename, I cannot think of any
> adverse effects to using ltdb_modify_internal() in the case where
> olddn
> and newdn are the same.
> 
> Am I missing something in the "bigger picture" here? 

Well, if your intention is to mimic AD, then I think we should also
change the DN, so perhaps a delete/add is still ok but just skip the
check as Abartlet proposes.

We could avoid this by using a different naming scheme for the db to
store objects by guid, but so far we are not agreeing on going into that
direction ...

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer
email: idra at samba.org
http://samba.org