Erich Hoover <ehoo...@mines.edu> writes: > The maintainer has pretty much "put his foot down" on the matter (several > times actually, here's a nicer one): > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-...@vger.kernel.org/msg01306.html > > This is rather embarrasing, but apparently I left server/protocol.def out of > the patchset. I could have sworn I tested these patches on a clean git, but > apparently I made a mistake. Is there any chance that this mistake is the > reason for the rejection? The additional code in these patches is only > utilized (sans a call to getsockopt) on UDP broadcast sockets that have been > bound to a specific interface. According to the kernel devs, this behavior > is what IP_PKTINFO is meant to do and that they have no intention of adding > an additional feature that does exactly the same thing.
I don't think you can do that reliably in user space, at least not in the Wine architecture. You'd have to put all the network I/O in the wineserver, and performance would suck. The kernel devs objection would work if it could be done directly inside the app, but I don't see a way to do that cleanly inside the Wine network layer. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
