Subject: Re: Updating arp(8) to use getifaddrs (cf. bin/8566)
To: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
From: Rafal Boni <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/08/2002 10:35:25
In message <20021107233053.A28047@noc.untraceable.net>, you write:
-> > SIOCGIFCONF is way too hard to get right, that's the very reason why
-> > we now have getifaddrs(3). i'm all for the change.
-> i beg to differ. i did "it", without knowing it was supposed to be
-> difficult, i have no doubt that you could "it", others have done "it"
-> in the past, and i'm sure others will do "it" in the future.
-> certainly, using getifaddrs(3) is "easier", but SIOCGIFCONF *not*
-> that said, i'm not at all opposed to the change, but what i am opposed
-> to is the FUD about SIOCGIFCONF.
I don't think it's *total* FUD, tough I agree with you that "it" is doable
and will continue to be done. However, "it" also caused a bunch of code
to break on architectured where strict alignment matters because the data
is returned packed and sometimes simply walking a ifreq pointer through
the buffer is not TRT, IIRC.
Rafal Boni email@example.com
We are all worms. But I do believe I am a glowworm. -- Winston Churchill