On Oct 15 22:23, Sam Steingold wrote:
> > * Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-10-12 22:42:34 +0200]:
> >
> > On Oct 12 15:17, Sam Steingold wrote:
> >> cyswin/socket.h:
> >>
> >> struct msghdr
> >> {
> >> void * msg_name; /* Socket name */
> >> int msg_namelen; /* Length of name */
> >> struct iovec * msg_iov; /* Data blocks */
> >> int msg_iovlen; /* Number of blocks */
> >> void * msg_accrights; /* Per protocol magic (eg BSD file
> >> descriptor passing) */
> >> int msg_accrightslen; /* Length of rights list */
> >> };
> >
> > This is the so called "older" implementation of struct msghdr as
> > defined up to 4.2BSD. Since it's quite useless so far and since
>
> I am not sure I quite understand what you mean by useless.
> is cygwin implementation somehow deficient?
>
sendmsg and recvmsg don't utilize the msg_accrights/msg_accrightslen member.
> > applications using this structure should accomodate the old
> > implementation anyway, I don't see a good reason to change this right
> > now.
>
> the only reason applications have to accommodate the old implementation
> is that some unixes still stick with it.
So, from a portability perspective...
> if you switch to the posix msghdr, I, for one, would not have to
> accomodate the old implementation.
I won't change it now. I'll change it at one point when there's some
functionality.
Hint: Applications using only the first four members of this structure
will be binary compatible...
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
