Subject: Re: ancillary data alignment and binary backward compatibility: please pick one
To: matthew green <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/28/2000 22:16:30
>> hmm... so, if we run sparc32 /sbin/route on sparc64 kernel,
>> /sbin/route will choke due to hardcoded sizeof(long) alignment.
>well, it *should*. note that it goes through an emulation layer
>and we're gonna need to special case a Lot of ioctl's here for this
>to work sanely (or, push part of this support out of compat/netbsd32).
>this emulation layer isn't quite finished yet though eduardo has done
>a large amount of work to make it so, at least for sparc64 (where it
>the idea is: there is no reason we can not run 32bit binaries on a
>64bit kernel. it is simply a matter of programming. :-)
so, will the emulation layer would change alignment constraints on
all the data on routing socket? hmm, I see I'm relieved.
back to the original question (CMSG_ALIGN), which one do you prefer?