Subject: Re: c-ares API vs c-ares source code provided functions (Win32 recommended reading)

Re: c-ares API vs c-ares source code provided functions (Win32 recommended reading)

From: Yang Tse <yangsita_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:34:18 +0100

2009/11/4, Daniel Stenberg wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Yang Tse wrote:
>
> >
> > > What apps need/want these functions then? I mean, if we just decide to
> not provide them to the outside world, who will be sad?
> > >
> >
> > I don't have that information, but affected users would be in the Win32
> DLL camp.

Any Windows version before Vista lack inet_pton and inet_ntop. cygwin
1.5.X has inet_pton and inet_ntop but these do not support IPv6.

When not cross-compiling, configure script detects if inet_pton and
inet_ntop are broken or not and when c-ares is built it uses the
appropriate working one.

So any system with missing or broken inet_pton and inet_ntop would be
fine candidates to use API provided ares_inet_pton and ares_ine_ntop,
when c-ares is built as a shared library.

> Given the responses so far, I think we can simply not provide them at all
> externally as a start.

Ok, I'll go that route.

-- 
-=[Yang]=-
Received on 2009-11-04