Dear Alfred, måndag den 21 november 2011 klockan 23:41 skrev Mats Erik Andersson detta: > måndag den 21 november 2011 klockan 13:52 skrev Alfred M. Szmidt detta: > > Ah, that wasn't my intention. I did sit for a while thinking of the > > logic here, and tried it on GNU where we have IPV6_HOPLIMIT and such. > > I'll think a bit more, if you have a solution please tell. > > You forgot the surrounding conditional. In addition I would like you > to check whether the replacement definitions are correct in your original > code, in the following suggestion, or in none of them! Is the conditional > around the text for IPV6_HOPLIMIT correct?
Alfred, could you consider giving this matter a priority larger than infinitesimally small? Afterwards, Simon will have an ideal time for producing a next snapshot. We have already now covered important build issues, as well as having helped GNUlib to resolve an fstatat issue that produced false negatives with our previous snapshot. This ping6 issue is the last I am presently aware of and which is an obstacle for every system except GNU/Linux. A reminder: Only IPV6_HOPLIMIT and IPV6_RECVHOPLIMIT are in fact used in "ping/ping6.c", whereas IPV6_2292HOPLIMIT was introduced in "configure.ac". My comments in the previous message should provided sufficient basis for you to decide on the implementation you originally intended. Best regards, Mats
