the sorry saga of the talloc soname 'fix'

Sam Liddicott sam at
Wed Jul 8 08:49:12 GMT 2009

* Volker Lendecke wrote, On 08/07/09 09:40:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 09:15:52AM +0100, Sam Liddicott wrote:
>> talloc_free is not safe to use, so we may as well get rid of it
>> altogether and thus fully justify the .so version bump.
> Wow. That's strong.
> I'd rather not have to remember everywhere I use talloc
> which the parent is. 
You only need to remember who the parent is if you want to explicitly free.
> I'd much more prefer to go back to
> talloc being the "hierarchical" memory allocator with a
> strict tree. 
Good. I posted a suggestion on how to do it, but no-one will read it.
> I don't see how without talloc_reference
> talloc_free becomes ambiguous.
It doesn't.
It becomes ambiguous through lack of specification on how they should


More information about the samba-technical mailing list