James Carlson wrote: > Joachim Worringen writes: > > 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).
Which link flags should a standard-compillant application use (e.g. C99/XPG6) for socket access ? AFAIK many opens-source projects only use "-lnsl -lsocket" in their code and aren't even aware about the option of using "-lxnet" and somehow prefer "-lnsl -lsocket" (e.g. Mozilla, X11 and the GNU stuff are examples). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
