Subject: Re: dhcpd
To: Tom Spindler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg Troxel <email@example.com>
Date: 09/13/2007 06:30:13
Tom Spindler <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> The real incompatible change is in -current but not 4, and -current has
>> binary compat with the old ioctl of smaller size. Binary compatibility
>> with the old version of SIOCGIFCONF in currrent, with the larger size
>> and the bizarre size-dependent behavior doesn't make sense, and would
>> cause the other half of the programs to fail (well, right now we have
>> dhcp vs racoon and I don't know about others).
> If this is the case, shouldn't the SIOCGIFCONF ioctl number be bumped?
It was bumped when sockaddr_storage was added, so it's different in 4
and current. Before 1.200, SIOCGIFCONF was broken in current. (Dhcpd
was and still is broken, but now the latent bug is causing trouble - but
I realize that this is overly harsh because the interface was never well
Are you suggesting that we have binary compat among versions of current,
even for bugfixes that cause trouble?