Commit: 1169dd3b50dfefa59b56cd1897bcd0b6c2ffb3be

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at
Sun Nov 22 20:21:15 MST 2009

On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 21:49 +1100, tridge at wrote:
> Hi Kamen,
>  > However, could you plese consider renaming this function to something 
>  > like ldb_msg_add_dn_string() (ldb_msg_add_string_dn()... whatever) 
>  > - this way it will be obvious it adds string representation of the DN, 
>  > not the DN itself.
> Is it ever valid to add a DN to a ldb_message as anything other than a
> string?

Yes, I think it should be ldb_msg_add_linearized_dn().  That would match
the current nomenclature of the ldb_dn.c code, and not add an extended
DN (which is another, quite valid DN form).

>  > Also, not copying linearized DN string could lead to some very
>  > tricky to resolve bugs. It seems replaces in ldb_map_inbound.c 
>  > are exactly this case - DN string is allocated in 'dn' context, 
>  > but the it is expected to live in 'ac->local_msg' context.
> I think you're right about this being a possible trap. 
> How about we add ldb_msg_add_string_copy(), which will be like
> ldb_msg_add_string() but which uses strdup(), and make
> ldb_msg_add_dn() use that?

Perhaps just use ldb_msg_add_steal_string() and

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                      
Authentication Developer, Samba Team 
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list