Subject: Re: ancillary data alignment and binary backward
To: None <>
From: Matt Thomas <>
List: tech-net
Date: 02/28/2000 09:07:44
At 05:16 AM 2/28/00 , wrote:

> >>      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
> >is essential!)
> >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.

Yes.  (or rather it should)

>         back to the original question (CMSG_ALIGN), which one do you prefer?

The first one.  It's simpler.
Matt Thomas               Internet:
3am Software Foundry      WWW URL:
Cupertino, CA             Disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message