Patch for supporting controls in ldbadd/ldbmodify and ldbdel

[Nadezhda Ivanova]

Hi Simo,
ldb_modify_ctrl is very simple and the only difference between it and ldb_modify is that it accepts controls. ldb_modify makes a request with NULL controls, so there ir little difference. I don't know if you looked at the code, but the change is minor indeed, and it really helps with code readability. If you insist I will revert it, but i am strongly against that, given the fact that it does not interfere with the current interface in any way and makes it easier to write requests with controls. I discussed the change with Tridge before pushing it, he didnt see a problem...

Regards,
Nadya
----- Original Message -----
> From: simo <idra at samba.org>
> To: samba-technical at lists.samba.org <samba-technical at lists.samba.org>
> Cc: Nadezhda Ivanova <nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 4:04:28 PM GMT+0200 Europe;Athens
> Subject: Re: Patch for supporting controls in ldbadd/ldbmodify and ldbdel

> > On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 18:08 +0300, Matthieu Patou wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Please find attached 2 patches for really supporting controls in 
> > ldbadd/ldbmodify and ldbdel as before the controls where not 
> transmitted 
> > to ldb_xxx
> > 
> > I put also some unitest to check that when controls are specified 
> they 
> > are really sent to the ldb_xx core function.
> > 
> > Please note that although that controls are less used for this 
> functions 
> > than for ldbsearch there is always some cases when it can be 
> intresting 
> > to have them (ie. when trying to reproduce a bug triggered by 
> control 
> > use ...).
> > 
> 
> Mathieu, I am not opposed to adding the capability of specifying 
> control
> to ldbadd and friends, but I don't want to expand the public API of 
> ldb.
> 
> Nadezhda,
> Mathieu made me aware you recently add ldb_modify_ctrl to common/ldb.c,
> 
> can you please revert it ?
> Any new funtion in ldb need maintenance in the long range, and we
> already have ldb_request + ldb_build_mod_req that can provide all you
> need.
> 
> You can easily build a wrapper around them, and even make it available
> to the whole samba4 code, but let's try to keep ldb's public interface
> down to the minimum necessary without adding more public functions 
> than
> needed.
> 
> Simo.
> 
> -- 
> Simo Sorce
> Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
> Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>