Re: Portability patches vs 1.7.0.2 [5/6]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:19:06PM +0000, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:

> ## sockaddr_t->ss_family is not portable

I assume you mean sockaddr_storage here?

> Many of our supported platforms do not have this declaration, for
> example solaris2.6 thru 2.8 (I can find a complete list of which of
> our supported platforms have this problem).

Did you mean that list to be inclusive? My Solaris 2.8 definitely has
sockaddr_storage, as it is necessary for IPv6 handling. I don't remember
when IPv6 support was added, though...if it was in a minor release, then
presumably earlier versions of 2.8 did not.

At any rate, we should only need it for IPv6 support, so I think the
right solution would be to include all uses inside an "#ifndef NO_IPV6",
and for the NO_IPV6 case assume it's a sockaddr_in.

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]