Joachim Worringen writes: > Greetings, > > I wonder about the relevance and consideration of XOPEN sockets. > > For certain XOPEN defines, i.e. socket() is mapped to __xnet_socket(), > which results in so_socket() being called with SOV_XPG4_2. However, this > does not seem to make much difference in the code, though, as I only > found checks like this one:
The flag is set when "-lxnet" is used, which is fairly common on Solaris. Many people use "-lxnet" in preference to "-lsocket -lnsl" because: - It's standards-compliant - It allows you to use ancillary data That latter one is quite important. Lack of a compatible way to introduce ancillary data on "old-style BSD" sockets is a big flaw with -lsocket, and a good reason to want to kill that library off eventually (so we're always XPG compliant). > [from socksctp.c - and sctp seems to be the only protocol that considers > this at all, judging from the code searches I did: > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/search?q=SOV_XPG4_2&defs=&refs=&path=&hist=&project=%2Fvolo] You'll probably want to use cscope or grep or even google. I don't think that search engine works very well. (It certainly seems to miss things.) > Conc. the relevance: X/Open sockets have been dropped from Stevens UNP > vol1, but it's still around: the latest binary from MySQL Cluster uses > __xnet_socket(). Anything that calls __xnet_socket directly is broken. I hope it's actually calling socket() and compiling with the right flags ... > The reason why I care at all is that we are implementing plug-in sockets > for low-latency communication (see project volo). Sounds good ... but both XPG and old-style sockets are required. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
