Re: Faure is back..
On 29 Sep 2000, James Antill wrote:
> Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> says:
>
> The immediate reason for the problem you see is that the sockaddr_in6
> structure changed. Complain the the appropriate working group, they
> added an sin6_scope_id field. getnameinfo() tests for the size of the
> passed-in address structure (the second parameter marks the size) and
> fails if it is too small. You will have to recompile all IPv6 enabled
> programs. I'll add a comment about this in the documentation.
Actually, I ran into this problem (or similar really) the last time that
the IPv6 group changed things a bit. That was in the early days of IPv6,
though, and this change is quite a bit more wide-reaching. Come to think
of it, I caught a similar message from Ulrich on the glibc list not too
long ago (so much for my mental rolodex working when I need it to).
> If changing sockaddr_in6 breaks backword compatibility with glibc 2.1.3 of
> getnameinfo then maybe ist time to drop getnameinfo(GLIBC_2.1) versioned
> symbol and introduce getnameinfo(GLIBC_2.2) ?
>
> Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> says:
>
> It's only changing for IPv6 and IPv6 is in flux. Everybody using it
> must be aware of it. I don't want to introduce all this hassle just
> because those $%%/§ in the IPv6 working group don't get their acts
> together.
>
> ...but that isn't a 32/64 issue AFAIK.
True. I won't comment on the obvious glibc issue involving this change,
but I will say that the IPv6 group needs to finalise things soon since
this changeover is approaching rapidly. What can we do, though, but sit
it out and wait to see how it all pans out :-P
Thanks for reminding me of this issue, though...I needed to update some
patches that I have for this change and had complete forgotten about it
until now.
C
Reply to: