[2688] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: More Unicos porting hell (struct inaddr)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Assar Westerlund)
Wed Oct 29 06:13:52 1997
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Ken Hornstein <kenh@cmf.nrl.navy.mil>, krbdev@MIT.EDU
From: Assar Westerlund <assar@sics.se>
Date: 29 Oct 1997 12:14:16 +0100
In-Reply-To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o"'s message of "Tue, 28 Oct 1997 23:55:38 -0500"
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU> writes:
> Wow, the Cray is really gross.
Agree. And the system software and libraries is quite ancient (in
certain areas): no ndbm, no writev, ...
> It basically appears to be inviting you to make the (unsafe)
> assumption that st_addr fits into a long. Most modern code uses the
> memcpy because future IP addresses (like IPv6) won't be 32 bits
> long. The Cray code, on the other hand, is practically forcing you
> to assume you can move IP addresses around using long's....
Sorry? IPv6 is not using `struct in_addr', it's using `struct
in6_addr'.
As I seem to be saying all the time, have a look at the code in
Heimdal, it supports IPv6. :-)
/assar
