X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Thu, 17 Aug 2006 19:12:13 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Alessandro Saffiotti <asaffio AT aass DOT oru DOT se>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RE: Cygwin 1.5.18: Problem using setsockopt() for multicast
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.CYG.4.58.0608171200170.2408@PC1163-8460-XP.flightsafety.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.21.0608171907430.28542-100000@aass.oru.se>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Greylist:	Sender DNS name whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (brevduva.oru.se [130.243.97.7]); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 19:13:21 +0200 (MEST)
X-oru-MailScanner:	Found to be clean
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Brian Ford wrote:
> 
> > and I have found that this, contrary to the IP_ADD_MEMBERSHIP case,
> > must be called BEFORE I bind the socket!
> 
> Um, that makes sense, doesn't it?

I guess it does.  I just wanted to mention it since the sentence

 "Note that it is necessary to bind to an address before calling the
  setsockopt() function." 

in the article that you kindly pointed out might mislead someone into
believing that setsockopt() must _always_ be called after bind().  
(Well, it misled me...;-)

  Alessandro




--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -