From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5346 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2014 04:09:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 5284 invoked by uid 48); 4 Feb 2014 04:09:46 -0000 From: "carlos at redhat dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug network/16421] IN6_IS_ADDR_UNSPECIFIED can use undefined s6_addr32 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 04:09:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: network X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: carlos at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16421 Carlos O'Donell changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |carlos at redhat dot com --- Comment #5 from Carlos O'Donell --- (In reply to Rich Felker from comment #3) > Well in that case a reasonable alternative would be to expose __s6_addr32 > instead of s6_addr32 in standards-conforming mode. Andreas Schwab comments[1] that the macros should themselves used the internal __s6_* names instead of the public ones, that way the implementation is always internally consistent. I see no reason why we shouldn't do that. It avoids the problem of always defining s6_addr32 being problematic. It doesn't require any code to check if you're in POSIX or non-POSIX conformance modes. [1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-04/msg00564.html Comments? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.