Hi Matthias,
On 03/06/10 20:01, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
diff --git a/source4/lib/registry/ldb.c b/source4/lib/registry/ldb.c
index 68639f5..12722c9 100644
--- a/source4/lib/registry/ldb.c
+++ b/source4/lib/registry/ldb.c
@@ -105,7 +107,8 @@ static struct ldb_message *reg_ldb_pack_value(struct
ldb_context *ctx,
switch (type) {
case REG_SZ:
case REG_EXPAND_SZ:
- if (data.data[0] != '\0') {
+ if ((data.length> 0)&& (data.data != NULL)
+ && (data.data[0] != '\0')) {
^^^ Why this overparanoid check ? If data.length is invalid we've got
bigger fish to fry.
convert_string_talloc(mem_ctx, CH_UTF16, CH_UTF8,
(void *)data.data,
data.length,
@@ -116,23 +119,27 @@ static struct ldb_message *reg_ldb_pack_value(struct
ldb_context *ctx,
}
break;
- case REG_BINARY:
- if (data.length> 0)
- ldb_msg_add_value(msg, "data",&data, NULL);
- else
+ case REG_DWORD:
+ if ((data.length> 0)&& (data.data != NULL)) {
^^^ Again, why this overparanoid check?
+ ldb_msg_add_string(msg, "data",
+ talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "0x%x",
+ IVAL(data.data, 0)));
+ } else {
ldb_msg_add_empty(msg, "data", LDB_FLAG_MOD_DELETE,
NULL);
+ }
break;
- case REG_DWORD:
- ldb_msg_add_string(msg, "data",
- talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx, "0x%x",
- IVAL(data.data, 0)));
- break;
+ case REG_BINARY:
default:
- ldb_msg_add_value(msg, "data",&data, NULL);
+ if ((data.length> 0)&& (data.data != NULL)
+ && (data.data[0] != '\0')) {
+ ldb_msg_add_value(msg, "data",&data, NULL);
+ } else {
+ ldb_msg_add_empty(msg, "data", LDB_FLAG_MOD_DELETE,
NULL);
+ }
+ break;
}
The delete doesn't seem right here - an empty value is not the same as
no value at all.
@@ -709,14 +718,27 @@ static WERROR ldb_set_value(struct hive_key *parent,
}
}
- ret = ldb_add(kd->ldb, msg);
- if (ret == LDB_ERR_ENTRY_ALREADY_EXISTS) {
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i< msg->num_elements; i++) {
- if (msg->elements[i].flags != LDB_FLAG_MOD_DELETE)
- msg->elements[i].flags = LDB_FLAG_MOD_REPLACE;
+ /* Try first a "modify" and if this doesn't work do try an "add" */
+ for (i = 0; i< msg->num_elements; i++) {
+ if (msg->elements[i].flags != LDB_FLAG_MOD_DELETE) {
+ msg->elements[i].flags = LDB_FLAG_MOD_REPLACE;
}
- ret = ldb_modify(kd->ldb, msg);
+ }
+ ret = ldb_modify(kd->ldb, msg);
+ if (ret == LDB_ERR_NO_SUCH_OBJECT) {
+ i = 0;
+ while (i< msg->num_elements) {
+ if (msg->elements[i].flags == LDB_FLAG_MOD_DELETE) {
+ ldb_msg_remove_element(msg,&msg->elements[i]);
+ } else {
+ ++i;
+ }
+ }
+ ret = ldb_add(kd->ldb, msg);
+ }
+ if (ret == LDB_ERR_NO_SUCH_ATTRIBUTE) {
+ /* ignore this -> the value didn't exist and also now doesn't
*/
+ ret = LDB_SUCCESS;
}
if (ret != LDB_SUCCESS) {
Can you explain the reasoning behind this change?
It doesn't seem quite right to ignore LDB_ERR_NO_SUCH_ATTRIBUTE. Why
would that ever apply?
Cheers,
Jelmer
