should we convert struct audit_names to audit_aux_data?

[Timothy R. Chavez]

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