On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 02:35:36PM -0600, William Rowe wrote: > If you want this resolved, we agree this needs to be reverted in apr 2.0? > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/network_io/unix/sa_common.c?view=log&pathrev=63986#rev60946 > > talk about ancient history, but most of the time we butt heads there's > a root in a bad design decision. If this decision was right, then > apr should have some reciprocal behavior to get from point A to B and > back again. Apparently internal consistency doesn't interest you? > I consider it essential, even if the user has to throw a flag to get > out of the mess we created.
I'd guess the original API was designed simply to produce some "human-readable" representation of the address, i.e. for logging purposes; it's not an unreasonable interface to provide per se. Perhaps changing it in 2.0 to add a flags argument to make the ::ffff:-stripping optional would make sense. (and also maybe exposing inet_pton and inet_ntop interfaces using apr_sockaddr_t) joe
