s4:dsdb: Fix code spelling

Signed-off-by: Jo Sutton <josutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>

diff --git a/source4/dsdb/repl/drepl_partitions.c b/source4/dsdb/repl/drepl_partitions.c
index 403dc9e0a102c6dd17f3e6a16c313097b74dae1b..461019a8c4a587558c5936e90834664d4ddbf28a 100644 (file)
--- a/source4/dsdb/repl/drepl_partitions.c
+++ b/source4/dsdb/repl/drepl_partitions.c
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ static NTSTATUS dreplsrv_get_target_principal(struct dreplsrv_service *s,
           DC. We find that by first looking for the msDS-HasDomainNCs
           in the NTDSDSA object of the DC, and if we don't find that,
           then we look for the hasMasterNCs attribute, and eliminate
-          the known schema and configuruation DNs. Despite how
+          the known schema and configuration DNs. Despite how
           bizarre this seems, Hongwei tells us that this is in fact
           what windows does to find the SPN!!
        */

diff --git a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c
index 70f76c4e1c14b768a6fb0470058f2fb978bacc6a..3166b43f80461a7d253c06cb4d5a3e52d2860fb1 100644 (file)
--- a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c
+++ b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/repl_meta_data.c
@@ -1056,7 +1056,7 @@ static int replmd_ldb_message_element_attid_sort(const struct ldb_message_elemen
 
        /*
         * TODO: make this faster by caching the dsdb_attribute pointer
-        *       on the ldb_messag_element
+        *       on the ldb_message_element
         */
 
        a1 = dsdb_attribute_by_lDAPDisplayName(schema, e1->name);
@@ -5108,7 +5108,7 @@ static int replmd_make_prefix_child_dn(TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx,
         * TODO: Per MS-ADTS 3.1.1.5.5 Delete Operation
         * we should truncate this value to ensure the RDN is not more than 255 chars.
         *
-        * However we MS-ADTS 3.1.1.5.1.2 Naming Constraints indicates that:
+        * However MS-ADTS 3.1.1.5.1.2 Naming Constraints indicates that:
         *
         * "Naming constraints are not enforced for replicated
         * updates." so this is safe and we don't have to work out not