Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:32:33 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <vinschen AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygdev <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: Patch to pass file descriptors
Message-ID:	<20020702113233.J23555@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygdev <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygdev <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 33 DOT 0207011735010 DOT 2716-100000 AT this>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.LNX.4.33.0207011735010.2716-100000@this>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.22.1i

On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 05:36:21PM -0400, David Euresti wrote:
>         I'm sure other people will want full BSD semantics also so why not
> allow them to have it if the cygserver is running.

Is your patch actually providing full BSD semantics?  Regardless that
your patch doesn't pass descriptors other than pipes and sockets,
it only allows to pass one descriptor while BSD allows to pass as
much descriptors as the maximum size of ancillary data limits to.

Another question to talk about first is, should we actually stick with
the old msg_accrights/msg_accrightslen members in struct msghdr or
should we switch over to the "modern" style msg_control/msg_controllen
definition?

>         Also should this discussion be moved to cygwin-developers?

Probably.  I moved it over.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

- Raw text -