Re: segfault in ldap_back_search() with ENABLE_REWRITE (ITS#2825)

[jongchoi@OpenLDAP.org]

I misinterpreted your previous posting.
Thanks. - Jong

> I wouldn't be so strict; however, the two things have different
> meanings: bv_val == NULL means there is no value; bv_len == 0
> means the value is empty, but it is a legal value.  So bv_len == 0
> should be allowed to coexist with bv_val != NULL, e.g. in the
> rootDSE, while bv_val == NULL should imply that bv_len must be
> ignored.
> 
> The use of either form should be consistent with the meaning
> of each berval.  For instance, a search base of { 0, NULL }
> has little meaning, while a search base of { 0, "" } makes
> sense.
> 
> This has nothing to do with the original posting, because
> in that case the berval pointer was null; I'd consider this
> occurrence undesirable, because it defeats the purpose of
> using bervals as arguments.  Note that all this discussion
> is outdated since the ABI change.
> 
> p.
> 
> -- 
> Pierangelo Masarati
> mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it