-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 258
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Various portability fixes #7861
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What does musl use instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure that there is a equivalent to glibc's NETDB_INTERNAL.
See glibc's implementation (https://github.com/bminor/glibc/blob/596130591ae4b058a529cc1318b95e624559054c/resolv/netdb.h#L63-L75) and musl's (https://github.com/bminor/musl/blob/c47ad25ea3b484e10326f933e927c0bc8cded3da/include/netdb.h#L123-L129). Also POSIX seems not to offfer a equivalent: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009696799/functions/gethostbyaddr.html
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But how will musl work with 'libnss_sss' if it doesn't expect -1 to be returned?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, do you know where libnss_sss returns NETDB_INTERNAL to musl?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure why above patch was so contained.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fossdd, what is your stance on this?
Do you want to dig deeper or are you fine to merely get code to the state "it compiled with musl"?
@sumit-bose, do you think we could extend 1a1e914 to replace all uses of
NETDB_INTERNAL
withNO_RECOVERY
/HOST_NOT_FOUND
(portable)?@scabrero, do you remember if there was a reason to use
NETDB_INTERNAL
specifically?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For me, it's fine. we already ship this code downstream, and afaik this snippet worked fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't remember if there was a specific reason by that time, but having a look it is probably because it is the way to say "check errno":
# define NETDB_INTERNAL -1 /* See errno. */
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, if nobody else chimes in in a next day or two, this will be merged "as is".