From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 31 15:31:42 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3438F16A477 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:31:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF5513C45A for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:31:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE29208E; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:31:33 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: -0.2/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFDB208A; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:31:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id F0D6E844A0; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:31:32 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: "Heiko Wundram \(Beenic\)" References: <200801310923.16029.wundram@beenic.net> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:31:32 +0100 In-Reply-To: <200801310923.16029.wundram@beenic.net> (Heiko Wundram's message of "Thu\, 31 Jan 2008 09\:23\:15 +0100") Message-ID: <86zlumvwob.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OT: getting the protocol family of a file descriptor X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:31:42 -0000 "Heiko Wundram (Beenic)" writes: > I'm currently in the need to get the protocol family that was used to > create a socket (and passed via a unix domain socket to another > program), and I've not really come up with a proper scheme other than > to use getsockname and retrieve sa_family from the resulting socket > (which currently matches the socket domain and historically has, but > why take the chances ;-)). This is the correct way to do it, I don't understand why you think it might not work in the future. > Is there any other "better" way to get at the domain (protocol family) > of a socket? Why should there be a better way? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no