David Miller a écrit :
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 14:00:21 -0800
That is not true on BSD or other unix standardish ioctl's.
There are no conflicts between the TIOC... values and the SIOC... values
There is absolutely nothing that we can do about this under
Linux without breaking every single application out there.
We allocated these values a long long time ago, before we
got the idea that we should perhaps use some kind of
macro system (as we mostly do now) to keep the values from
conflicting.
Seems like one of those annoying standards compliance test
return value bugs that shouldn't really hit an application.
Being non-compliant, and being unable to become compliant,
it actually a feature and a huge weight off of our shoulders,
don't you think? :-)
Well, as long you/we dont break isattty() (which try an
ioctl(fd,TCGETS,&termios) on the fd), it should be OK.
So TCGETS *MUST* return an error on a socket (and other non tty files)
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
