[openbeosnetteam] Re: libbind.so status

> > Well, in fact in POSIX sys/socket.h standard, it should be SHUT_RD, not  
> > SHUTDOWN_RECV: 
> > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/sys/ 
> > socket.h.html 
>  
> Oh, then BONE has wrong names here. I will add the other constants, too. 
 
Dunno why BONE don't follow POSIX names. 
Anyway, aliasing constants is the way to go, right. 
 
> > But SO_NONBLOCK is a BeOS R5-specific socket option when  
> > SO_BINDTODEVICE is a BONE-specific one... 
> > Anyway, there is a real mess on non blocking mode support in the stack,  
> > that right. 
> > Several confusion between file descriptor FIONBIO ioctl() opcode, BeOS  
> > specifig B_SET_[NON_]BLOCKING_IO opcode and SO_NONBLOCK... 
>  
> And we cannot remove three of them? :) 
 
Can't answer. Yet. :-) 
 
> I saw SO_NONBLOCK in the BONE socket.h header, so I put into ours, too. 
 
I agree, we need to support this socket option for BONE compatibility. 
I was just talking loud about what the current (broken?) support we (may?) 
have on which we could, if possible, rely. 
 
> > > Let's make our netstack a complete BONE replacement until Waltercon  
> > > (stability does not matter, only functionality-wise). 
> >  
> > Again... what!? 
> > When is WalterCon already? In June, right? 
> >  
> > There's still several BONE features missing, like DHCP, BoneYard,  
> > libpcap support, and boot network configuration... 
> > And... there is some choice to make before. 
> > I know I'm not enough active, but we didn't even discuss about the best  
> > way to bring both R5 and BONE compatibility, I was expecting we could  
> > find a cleaner way than duplicating code. 
> > Anyway... 
>  
> Okay, a more realistic aim: Get Mozilla for BONE working with our netstack. 
> This would be cool. 
 
Okay, good milestone, then. 
  
> > I understand you can feel a loonely coder. But, as in the past, every  
> > time one is highly productive, the others can follow him, even if they  
> > would have find time to try. 
>  
> As you can see it did not work as expected. ;) 
 
Obviously, it should be read as "the others CAN'T follow him..." 
Hence why it didn't work as expected :-) 
 
-- Philippe

Other related posts: