[Patch] fix some warnings in ldb

[Simo]

On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 07:31 +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 09:41:07PM -0700, Matthieu Patou wrote:
> > On 08/16/2013 05:06 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > >On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:26:37PM -0700, Matthieu Patou wrote:
> > >>Please review & push.
> > >Could the first one also be fixed with the attached patch? I
> > >don't think the const is strictly required here. I'm taking
> > >a look at this code for the first time how, so it might be
> > >perfectly possible that I'm missing something. But I think
> > >if we can avoid a discard_const, we should do so.
> > >
> > >Volker
> > >
> > I think it's ok but as there is more or less a dickat on not
> > changing existing API for ldb I was not keen on changing the
> > signature even thought it's only from const to non const, also I
> > have to check that now it didn't generate more warnings for callers
> > as if we pass const variable it will then generate a warning
> > elsewhere.
> 
> According to git grep, there were only two callers. One put
> in NULL, the other a non-const. This seems to be a pretty
> internal call.

Go ahead and push it, this is a completely private interface and can be
changed from const to non-const w/o issues if necessary.

Simo.