Eric Haszlakiewicz <[email protected]> writes: > For cross-OS support you'll need to add a configure check for that. > In some environments it seems that the memory leak can't be fixed, > since res_ndestroy doesn't exist.
Looks that way -- Linux doesn't even have res_nclose(), so I guess programmers who decide to go this low-level need to adapt their code carefully to the systems it is to run on. Now, why the opendmarc people decided to use these calls in the first place, I don't understand. They create a new resolver, perform a single query using it, and tear it back down. If it were to do something special, like, say, setting RES_BLAST instead of RES_ROTATE, I could understand it. This is just weird. Is there something I'm not seeing? -tih -- Most people who graduate with CS degrees don't understand the significance of Lisp. Lisp is the most important idea in computer science. --Alan Kay
