context, ent.principal,
- qpw->rs_new.bv_val, &local_keys, &local_num_keys);
- if (ret != 0)
- break;
-
- hdb_free_keys(context, ent.keys.len, ent.keys.val);
- ent.keys.val = local_keys;
- ent.keys.len = local_num_keys;
-
-
+ ret = _kadm5_set_keys(kadm_context, &ent, qpw->rs_new.bv_val);
hdb_seal_keys(context, db, &ent);
krb5_free_principal( context, ent.principal );

@@ -431,7 +419,7 @@
}
BER_BVZERO( &keys[i] );

- hdb_free_keys(context, ent.keys.len, ent.keys.val);
+ _kadm5_free_keys(kadm_context, ent.keys.len, ent.keys.val);

if ( i != ent.keys.len ) {
ber_bvarray_free( keys );

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Scott Grizzard <scott@scottgrizzard.com> wrote:

If you have a patch, that would be great. I just started to dig into it, and I haven't looked at Heimdal's libraries until now.

- Scott

On Jan 11, 2009, at 2:51 PM, David Markey wrote:

i submitted that bug, do we need a patch or do you want to take over scott?

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Scott Grizzard <scott@scottgrizzard.com> wrote:
> Never mind. I found the issue on the mailing lists, now that I know exactly
> what is causing the problem.
>
> I'll take a crack at it next weekend - no promises though.
>
> - Scott Grizzard
>
> On Jan 10, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Scott Grizzard wrote:
>
>> That is for Heimdal 1.2. I am using 1.1. Since I have seen it work for
>> heimdal 1.0.1, is it correct to assume that the module was written for 1.0,
>> and that significant changes happened to the API between 1.0 and 1.1?
>>
>> Would a patch for 1.2 fix the issue for Heimdal 1.1? (or... if I was to
>> take the time to patch it for 1.1, would that patch work for 1.2?) I am not
>> familiar enough with Heimdal to know.
>>
>> - Scott Grizzard
>>
>> On Jan 10, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Howard Chu wrote:
>>
>>> Scott Grizzard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am trying to make the smbk5pwd module manage password syncing with
>>>> Samba and Kerberos. I am running on Ubuntu Server 8.10 with
>>>> openldap-2.4.11 and heimdal 1.1.
>>>>
>>>> I can "make" the smbk5pwd module, but when I run a password change using
>>>> it, I recieve the following error:
>>>
>>>> I've messed with this thing for quite a while now, but nothing seems to
>>>> be working. Any ideas?
>>>
>>> This is ITS#5799. A patch was supposedly available, but the person who
>>> submitted the bug report never attached the patch to the report. Feel free
>>> to nudge the submitter, we already have...
>>>
>>> --
>>> -- Howard Chu
>>> CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
>>> Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
>>> Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
>>
>
>