hmm.. Re: talloc issues

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Tue Jul 28 09:47:35 MDT 2009

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:20:39PM +0100, Sam Liddicott wrote:
> > Sorry, I'm lost here. If talloc_free is deprecated, 
> It's not.
> It's just been used so much on purpose to "get rid of random latest
> parent" and these uses need to be removed.

I don't even fully understand what you mean by this.

So I am not able to do this code audit. To me talloc is
strictly hierarchical and there is no such thing as "random
latest parent". Having to think about possible security
holes or memory leaks by calling talloc_free (How weird is
that. Creating a memory leak by calling talloc_FREE(!!) in a
subtly wrong context) makes it unusable to me.

Talloc_reference needs to go. It might be useful in your
context, but for mere mortals like me this is just not
acceptable. In projects with more complexity than Samba 3
has and where all the smart cookies do programming this
might be common practice, but it is way over my head.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list