Hi Martin, On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 09:24:01AM +0200, Martin Storsj? wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 06:40:37PM +0200, Martin Storsj? wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > > > > > > > Many of our supported platforms do not have this declaration, for > > > > example solaris2.6 thru 2.7. Lack of ss_family implies no IPV6 > > > > support, so we can wrap all the ss_family references in an ifndef > > > > NO_IPV6, and assume sockaddr_in otherwise. > > > > > > While this probably is ok as such, you can actually do the same without > > > accessing the sockaddr_storage->ss_family; just cast it to (const struct > > > sockaddr*) and use ->sa_family instead, that should work just as well, as > > > far as I know. > > > > At least on aix-5.2 it won't be reliable unless you juggle compiler > > switches just right [...] > > Yes, but if the sockaddr struct can be arranged in different ways, the > other ones (sockaddr_in, sockaddr_storage, sockaddr_in6) must also be > defined coherently - you're always supposed to be able to cast an > sockaddr_in (or any other of them) to a sockaddr and read the sa_family > field. As far as I know, at least. Ah, good point. And now, having tested that on all our machines it works perfectly, and is much more elegant! I'll resubmit presently. Cheers, -- Gary V. Vaughan (gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) -- 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