> The issue here is, that the protocols, that are below SMB,
> are more like sockets. From a clean point of view, they
> should be implemented in the kernel, but none of us is
> willing to write kerneldrivers for each OS out there.
however, on NT, some functions already exist, such as CreateNamedPipe.
and there is no way in hell i'm writing a kerneldriver for NT when there's
a perfectly good function already out there.
however, i _am_ prepared to "mirror" that functionality in systems that
_don't_ have a CreateNamedPipe function.
so, the implementation of apr_nal_create_socket("namedpipe:foo", ...) on
NT will call CreateNamedPipe. which i should imagine will be utterly
trivial to do.
and the implementation on non-NT systems will go through hoops and layers
like there's no tomorrow [i.e. emulating what NT does in the kernel.
*yuck* :)].
if the buckets principle can hide this from a developer, so be it.
> - NT named Pipes (those are like Unix domain sockets and
> include authentication already, while the unix side needs
> to add that)
----- Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
"i want a world of dreams, run by near-sighted visionaries"
"good. that's them sorted out. now, on _this_ world..."
