Re: CMSG bugs

 On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:51:53 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 10/09/2011 08:48 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> We are hitting bugs in CMSG_* macros on several systems (Windows,
>> NetBSD, MacOS, and likely their derivatives).
>
> I would like to help with these but bugzilla search for CMSG turned
> out
> nothing for me. Could you point me to specific bug reports we need to
> address?
>

 The most up to date info is about MacOSX in this thread here (post #4):
  
 http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Building-on-Mac-OSX-td3840262.html

 Windows we have already discussed the absence of CMSG.

>
>> I've found a discussion from Feb (this year!) which seems to explain
>> some of the build problems reported recently.
>>
>> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2011/02/24/msg004623.html
>>
>> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2011/02/24/msg004626.html
>
> I cannot say I understand everything those folks say, but it looks
> like
> we may want to do what scm-rights.h does.
>
>
>> Does anyone know of an alternative for passing the SMP packets data
>> around?
>
> IIRC, CMSG macros are needed to pass file descriptors only but
> passing
> descriptors was one of the primary reason for using UDS.
>
> For passing file descriptors on Unix, I know of three choices:
>
> 1. Use threads instead of processes.
> 2. Use UDS and CMSG stuff.
> 3. Use STREAMS and ioctl stuff.
>
> Given the above choice, and all the pros and cons of each option, I
> still think we made the right decision to go with UDS.
>
>
>> It looks like we may be headed down the same road that scm-rights.h
>> rant
>> was all about.
>
> Agreed. While it sounds like there is a big API problem there, their
> solution seems simple enough, although I do not know how they set
> NEW_CMSG_INTERFACE.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex.
Received on Mon Oct 10 2011 - 21:17:09 MDT