Subject: Re: threads support (scheduler activation) and libraries
To: Perry E. Metzger <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/24/2002 15:47:58
>> > (for example, nsdispatch directly conflicst with BIND8 irs.conf)
>> > what are the grand plan?
>> What are the API changes from bind4 -> bind8? We may simply have to
>> reimplement it ourselves (and provide backward-compatibility to the
>> bind4 ABI).
>Another question, I suppose, is whether there is an even newer bind9
>set we should be planning on ultimately moving to.
without having looked very closely at it, i'd have to guess that the
size of res (a struct __res_state) has probably grown from each one to
the next, but that the api itself is probably the same (except perhaps
with more features as time goes by).
would it be horrific to suggest that the new apis (and structures) be
pulled in and versioned ala __RENAME()?
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."