On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 02/16/2012 04:58 PM, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
Given the way the thread's gone so far, I think I'd prefer to see an
upstream commit/release first, unless the issue is particularly urgent?
Well, it appears to be related to a couple other bugs, and upstream has
done nothing about it for over a year, which leaves me wondering when it
will get resolved upstream.
The change doesn't introduce any API modifications, and (as far as i can
tell) the only possible hiccup for debian will be dealing with the
unimplemented symbol Socket::SO_PROTOCOL on kfreebsd.
Apparently freebsd doesn't currently implement SO_PROTOCOL, though i
haven't been able to find a reason for that (i did find someone's
proposed patch, though [0]).
(i'm cc'ing the debian-bsd list here in hopes that they know of some
other way to retrieve the protocol of an existing socket from userspace
with that kernel)
Upstream FreeBSD svn commits 232179 and 232180 should probably get
mentioned on this bug.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Log:
Add SO_PROTOCOL/SO_PROTOTYPE socket SOL_SOCKET-level option to get the
socket protocol number. This is useful since the socket type can
be implemented by different protocols in the same protocol family,
e.g. SOCK_STREAM may be provided by both TCP and SCTP.
Submitted by: Jukka A. Ukkonen <jau iki fi>
PR: kern/162352
Discussed with: bz
Reviewed by: glebius
MFC after: 2 weeks
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Log:
Document SO_PROTOCOL socket option.
Discussed with: bz
Reviewed by: glebius
MFC after: 2 weeks
%%%%%%%%%%%%
From a few days ago, actually (Feb 26).
I don't know how this meshes with kFreeBSD taking snapshots from upstream,
though.
-Ben Kaduk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
