From 3199e02884af3b14348a88e8d8d7bc852212536f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew Tridgell Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:01:51 +1100 Subject: s4-dsdb: add a comment on the use of ldb_rename() We need to use ldb_rename() and not dsdb_module_rename() here as we need the rename to be processed by the current module --- source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) (limited to 'source4/dsdb') diff --git a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c index 7488a1bee9..dadaf32f80 100644 --- a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c +++ b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c @@ -2078,6 +2078,9 @@ static int replmd_replicated_apply_merge(struct replmd_replicated_request *ar) ldb_debug(ldb, LDB_DEBUG_TRACE, "replmd_replicated_request rename %s => %s\n", ldb_dn_get_linearized(ar->search_msg->dn), ldb_dn_get_linearized(msg->dn)); + /* we can't use dsdb_module_rename() here as we need + the rename call to be intercepted by this module, to + allow it to process linked attribute changes */ if (ldb_rename(ldb, ar->search_msg->dn, msg->dn) != LDB_SUCCESS) { ldb_debug(ldb, LDB_DEBUG_FATAL, "replmd_replicated_request rename %s => %s failed - %s\n", ldb_dn_get_linearized(ar->search_msg->dn), -- cgit