On Wed, 19 Jan 2000, Joerg Reuter DL1BKE wrote:
> Hi,
> for some reason I didn't get the original message.
Was not to linux-hams ..
> > > - new SIOCAX25GETINFO - ax25_info_struct now includes information about
> > > VR,VS,VA,WINDOW,PACLEN so programs may get those information through
> > > ioctl() and do not need to read /proc/net/ax25.
>
> How did you do that? By changing struct ax25_info_struct?
> Please give SIOCAX25GETINFO a different number then and support the
> old ioctl as SIOCAX25GETINFO_OLD because a change of the struct
> would break binary compatibility with existing applications.
Some compatibility was included in original patch but I think it was right
to remove it. I don't like obsolete code hanging around.
> > Is in.
> > However, I removed the compatibility-stuff. People should accept that they
> > have to recompile their user-level tools if something does not work, at
> > least in this stage of development.
>
> I strongly disagree when it comes to applications. It is okay and
> necessary to adjust the basic configuration tools, breaking normal
> applications is a Bad Thing. There is simply no need to break applications
> just for some data that nobody should care about but the protocol stack
> itself - it was an error in the first place to implement even the current
> version, it is a misfeature if an application scans /proc for these things.
TNT has such a "misfeature" .. not that I think that bunch of p2c'ed code
is nice or something .. but hey .. there is no other way to get # of
unacked frames (users want it).
BTW: There is exactly no way to get # of unsent frames.
> Anyway, we have this thing as a documented feature and we're now stuck
> with it for at least a while. Simply breaking existing code and saying
> "your problem, recompile" is outright arrogant and causes a lot of
> headache for those people who need to switch between different kernel
> versions from time to time.
We're talking about 2.3.*/upcoming 2.4.* kernels remember ?
I don't suppose 2.4 kernels to work well with 2.2 distros (same as
2.0/2.2)
> Besides, you won't get it past Linus anyway.
Well there are some parts in current kernel AX25 I'm wondering how they
got there :)
Regards Jan
