Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
On 25/10/06, Paul Klissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just in time for another diagram update:
http://www.freemyimage.com/ims/pic.php?u=1500BLfhm&i=15920
Instead of putenv(), the goal now is to use IFDHcontrol() to
pass a new control code designed can be tolerated by all
IFD Handlers to pass in a client cred structure that includes
X display info, EUID, EGID, and possibly other info.
I think it is better to use IFDHcontrol(). At least the communication
is more explicit.
Note that you can use IFDHGetCapabilities(...,
SCARD_ATTR_VENDOR_IFD_TYPE, ...) (or another similar tag) to check
that the IFD will understand the IFDHcontrol() request.
Bye,
Thanks. That is very useful information.
That really helps clean up the approach.
putenv() was a less desireable fallback for not knowing
how to easily address the compatibility problem.
Glad there is a straightforward way to handle it.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Muscle mailing list
Muscle@lists.musclecard.com
http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle
