Martin Pool wrote:
On 27 Nov 2003, Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's needed to make IPv6 support work, since sockaddr_in6 is typically bigger than sockaddr.
Okay, that is reasonable.
The intent of the change was that sockaddr_storage would only be used if you give --enable-rfc2553. RFC2553 requires sockaddr_storage. Is there a problem in how this is done?
Hmm..., well, I don't see how that could be since there are no preprocessor protections around the sockaddr_storage structures in dparent.c and prefork.c. I didn't pass --enable-rfc2553 to configure and I ran into build problems. So, I guess that there must be a problem in the way that this got implemented.
It's meant to be #defined in distcc.h. I've just changed the replacement type to dcc_sockaddr_storage to make it more clear.
What was HAVE_SOCKADDR_STORAGE showing on Cygwin?
I don't see HAVE_SOCKADDR_STORAGE in config.log, but I do see tests for sockaddr_storage. Please see the attached config.log.bz2.
Harold
config.log.bz2
Description: Binary data
__ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
