Re: should we convert struct audit_names to audit_aux_data?
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 07:49, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 16:01 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> Does it not make sense to consolidate all auxiliary data in the
> audit_context to audit_aux_data? The audit_names structure looks like
> a perfect candidate for audit_aux_data... yes/no?
In general, yes. But I think we're not able to allocate memory for
names. Wasn't this discussed before?
*shrug* just glancing at it... its looks doable using the same methodology as
the array, just have to allocate a list where one could propigate an error
should one occur, and then splice the list into the aux_item_list just prior
to exiting.
-tim