| To: | dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: IPV6 RFC3542 compliance [PATCH] |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 07 Jun 2005 15:33:59 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <OF9F62ECDB.67FFA191-ON88257019.001F5EA8-88257019.00234AB6@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <20050607.141922.65612976.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <OF9F62ECDB.67FFA191-ON88257019.001F5EA8-88257019.00234AB6@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <OF9F62ECDB.67FFA191-ON88257019.001F5EA8-88257019.00234AB6@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Mon, 6 Jun 2005 23:25:28 -0700), David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx> says: > And those same binaries would not work when recompiled, > because the option names in the source would match the > new numbers, but still have the old arguments-- an error to > be detected at run-time, only. It is not good at all to break API at this moment (2.6.x). Portable applications do like this: #ifdef IPV6_RECVHOPOPTS // RFC2292bis #else // RFC2292 #endif --yoshfuji |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: IPV6 RFC3542 compliance [PATCH], David Stevens |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: IPV6 RFC3542 compliance [PATCH], David Stevens |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: IPV6 RFC3542 compliance [PATCH], David Stevens |
| Next by Thread: | Re: IPV6 RFC3542 compliance [PATCH], David Stevens |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |