[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: busybox
Subject: Re: patch - ping select interface.
From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux () googlemail ! com>
Date: 2007-10-19 21:32:09
Message-ID: 200710192232.09364.vda.linux () googlemail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
On Friday 19 October 2007 07:21, Loïc Grenié wrote:
> 2007/10/19, Bob Keyes <bob@eecs.harvard.edu>:
> > I am new here, not sure of the
> > regular way I am supposed to make contributions, but whoever is in charge
> > of accepting patches please take a look at
> > https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/2522 which will explain the rational for
> > the feature and includes the patch for it.
>
> I took the liberty to make the patch against current svn.
>
> Loïc Grenié
Thanks! It made it really trivial for me to fix it.
One question for IPv6 gurus: for ipv6 we have this:
static void ping6(len_and_sockaddr *lsa)
{
if (opt_I)
setsockopt(pingsock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_BINDTODEVICE, opt_I, strlen(opt_I) + 1);
...
if (if_index)
pingaddr.sin6.sin6_scope_id = if_index;
...
int ping_main(int argc, char **argv)
{
...
if (option_mask32 & OPT_I) { // -I
if_index = if_nametoindex(opt_I);
Seems redundant for me. Are these two different (equally valid)
ways of setting IPv6 source interface or is one of them wrong?
I don't know enough about IPv6.
I will aplly it as-is, can remove one of those later if deemed ok.
--
vda
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic