gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Jason Pyeron
I am tring to port an application, but I cant seem to find the glibc2 gethostbyname_r function. Does anyone know? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Oct 11 10:15, Jason Pyeron wrote: I am tring to port an application, but I cant seem to find the glibc2 gethostbyname_r function. Does anyone know? It doesn't exist on Cygwin. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Jason Pyeron
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Oct 11 10:15, Jason Pyeron wrote: I am tring to port an application, but I cant seem to find the glibc2 gethostbyname_r function. It doesn't exist on Cygwin. so is this the only way to go? has any one verified the code? http

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Brian Ford
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Jason Pyeron wrote: On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Oct 11 10:15, Jason Pyeron wrote: I am tring to port an application, but I cant seem to find the glibc2 gethostbyname_r function. It doesn't exist on Cygwin. so is this the only way to go? has any

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Richard Campbell
Brian Ford wrote: There is almost no need for gethostbyname_r on Cygwin since its sole purpose is to create a thread safe interface. In most all cases, Cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe. http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-05/msg00202.html 1) Resolving a numeric host is more common

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Oct 11 12:10, Richard Campbell wrote: Brian Ford wrote: There is almost no need for gethostbyname_r on Cygwin since its sole purpose is to create a thread safe interface. In most all cases, Cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe. http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-05/msg00202.html

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 12:10:57PM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: Brian Ford wrote: There is almost no need for gethostbyname_r on Cygwin since its sole purpose is to create a thread safe interface. In most all cases, Cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe. http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Richard Campbell
Christopher Faylor wrote: AFAIK, cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe in all cases. Since I was referencing you for the proposition that it was not thread safe in the case of resolving a numeric IP, (http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-05/msg00182.html ) I'll certainly defer to you.

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 01:35:44PM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: AFAIK, cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe in all cases. Since I was referencing you for the proposition that it was not thread safe in the case of resolving a numeric IP,

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Gerrit P. Haase
Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 12:10:57PM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: Brian Ford wrote: There is almost no need for gethostbyname_r on Cygwin since its sole purpose is to create a thread safe interface. In most all cases, Cygwin's gethostbyname is thread safe. http

Re: gethostbyname_r

2005-10-11 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 10:54:32PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 12:10:57PM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: Brian Ford wrote: There is almost no need for gethostbyname_r on Cygwin since its sole purpose is to create a thread safe interface

Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Enzo Michelangeli
put my gethostbyname_r() in the public domain, rather than going through the bureaucratic chore of the copyright assignment? Also because I feel that implementing it through mutex-protection of gethostbyname(), as I did, is just a quick hack, as it unnecessarily blocks other threads that could

RE: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Dave Korn
12:03 PM Subject: Re: 1.5.9-1: socket() appears NOT to be thread-safe P.S. By the way, Corinna: couldn't I just put my gethostbyname_r() in the public domain, rather than going through the bureaucratic chore of the copyright assignment? Also because I feel that implementing

RE: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Chris January
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Korn Sent: 15 April 2004 14:03 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock -Original Message- From: cygwin-owner

Re: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Enzo Michelangeli
From: Dave Korn dk at artimi dot com To: cygwin at cygwin dot com Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 14:02:38 +0100 Subject: RE: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock [...] Well, OK, here is the code, hereby placed in the public domain. Everybody can do

Re: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 02:02:38PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: Ah, but it's not a matter of it having no copyright, but of the copyright existing and belonging to the FSF so that the GPL can be enforced on the file. If you submit a completely PD bit of source to a GPL project, other people can take

RE: Quick hack to implement gethostbyname_r() through gethostbyname()+mutex lock

2004-04-15 Thread Dave Korn
-Original Message- From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor Sent: 15 April 2004 14:23 On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 02:02:38PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: Ah, but it's not a matter of it having no copyright, but of the copyright existing and belonging to the FSF so that the GPL can