On 07/10/2009 03:16, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 01/10/2009 07:12, Jon TURNEY wrote:
+ if (TransIsListening("local"))
+ {
+ snprintf(szDisplay, 512, ":%s.%d", display, screen);
+ }
+ else if (TransIsListening("inet"))
+ {
+ snprintf(szDisplay, 512, "127.0.0.1:%s.%d", display, screen);
+ }
+ else if (TransIsListening("inet6"))
+ {
+ snprintf(szDisplay, 512, "::1:%s.%d", display, screen);
+ }
Perhaps we should be giving priority to inet6 over inet if it's available?
I don't know. I didn't think very much about the order.
I guess we should prefer inet first, as that's what we are doing currently, so
at least in theory we know that works. I don't know if there's any
performance reason to prefer a unix socket (I think they are implemented using
a IP socket anyhow?).
What reasons are there for preferring inet6?
+ else
+ {
+ // this can't happen!
+ snprintf(szDisplay, 512, "localhost:%s.%d", display, screen);
+ }
If this can't happen, an ErrorF would be appropriate.
Good catch, thanks.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
