[openbeosnetteam] Re: Fix for resolving host names
- From: "Brennan Cleveland" <warriorspot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:39:42 -0600
I'll volunteer to work on libnet.so. I am testing anyway, and
finding the bugs involves digging in, as in this host name resolution
problem...
So, what is the conculsion to the immediate issue of fixing the
segmentation violations? Do we want to do a quick fix for that
(either mine or Waldemars) or leave it as is until the whole of
libnet.so is cleaned up? My vote is to put the short term fix in
now, so I and others can test the rest of the stack without having to
type in IP addresses :).
Thanks,
Brennan
---- Original Message ----
From: Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx
To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [openbeosnetteam] Re: Fix for resolving host names
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 17:21:42 +0100
>> That sounds like a big mess to me.
>
>The whole stack is one BIG mess, but we do not care anymore. :)
>It seems that getting a nice stack is the objective for R2. But
>actually, libnet.so will (or should) be reused, so that one could be
>cleaned up now. Any volunteers?
>
>> 1) what is h_errno actually used for?
>
>It is used to report the error status, I think. ;)
>
>> 2) if it's used like the POSIX errno variable, why not copy the
>exact
>> mechanism?
>
>I will try to find out how it is used exactly (or if it is used at
>all). Why is there h_errno_tls then?
>Is our POSIX errno thread-specific or global?
>
>Bye,
>Waldemar
>
Other related posts:
