Subject: Re: rpc.bootparamd problem on alpha?
To: Mark H. Levine <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 01/06/1998 08:43:40
> I actually mentioned this exact problem several months ago.
> I have not looked at the internet headers for 1.3 in detail
> yet, but using "long" for an ipv4 address seemed to be all
> over the 1.2 sources, where it needs to be unsigned 32-bit int.
It's quite fine (bug-wise, at least 8-) to use 'long' for an IP
address in most situations.
However, it's _not_ fine to treat a (long *) like an "ip address
pointer". That's what the code in question was doing. There aren't
_too_ many instances of this in the source tree, because I debugged an
awful lot of them. (For instance, rpc.bootparamd used to work for me.
I wonder if a change reintroduced a problem.)