Thanks for the responses. On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 15:45 -0700, Michael Hunter wrote: > seb-097 ncu_ip.c'540-582: The strategy used to figure out if a logical > interface is needed or if it's the first address seems error prone and > certainly not thread safe (although I'm not sure if thread safety is a > concern for this function). This seems to be needed as a side-effect of the > distinction between the newly introduced icfg_add_ipaddr() vs. > icfg_set_addr() functions. It should be possible to fix this by defining a > single icfg_add_addr() function that just does the right thing. > > rewritten significantly, less complex and covers add/set distinction in > add_ip_address > > On a related note, why is one _ipaddr() and the other _addr()? > > We inherited libinetcfg. Ask the bad boy who wrote it?
My point is that there is an existing convension of _addr in libinetcfg, and the NWAM project is adding a conflicting convention of _ipaddr. The disparate nomenclature is entirely due to the new NWAM code. I don't understand the response. -Seb
