On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 15:05 -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: > Greg Martin wrote: > > > > I'd have to say no. There are structures used but not documented and the > > one line description of some of the functions could be open to > > interpretation. Sample usage is never amiss in my estimation. > > I'd appreciate knowing what you found missing. I know it's pretty barren as > is, but whatever left you guessing would be a good place for me to start > filling it out.
I probably should have subscribed to the list since I seem to be abusing it this way. In any event: I searched the code for the definition of tls_accept_socket and it certainly returns an int so I changed my code back and the compiler doesn't argue the case now. I don't know what the issue was earlier. The function still wasn't returning so I checked the source and it is expecting the second argument pointer to be initialized to NULL. Once I did that the method returns successfully. It probably should be mentioned in the man page. I'm not successfully reading the headers but it is Saturday and that is enough of that for now. -Greg.
