This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: if_nameindex with 2.2 kernel

From: Roland McGrath <roland at frob dot com>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>
Cc: GNU libc hacker <libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:55:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: if_nameindex with 2.2 kernel

> On Wed, 2002-07-24 at 14:03, Roland McGrath wrote:
> 
> > It's not clear to me that __opensock is actually useful for anything other
> > than if_nameindex.
> 
> I've no problem with changing this if it is necessary or beneficial.  If
> you provide a patch it can go in.

Well, how do you mean?  For the reasons you've mentioned, the current
behavior of __opensock is ideal for if_nameindex, which on current Linux
kernels requires no particular network stacks at all to work.  For the
reasons I've mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any reason for the other
callers (res_hconf.c and getifaddrs) to do anything but an explicit socket
call.  I can put in the change to make res_hconf.c not use __opensock
and do the same in getifaddrs when i put that in.  Is that what you mean?

(I also have another change to ifreq.h to let res_hconf.c open just one
socket instead of two.)

Follow-Ups:
- Re: if_nameindex with 2.2 kernel
  - From: Ulrich Drepper

References:
- Re: if_nameindex with 2.2 kernel
  - From: Ulrich Drepper

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]