apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karsten Paige Huneycutt <...@duke.edu>
Subject RE: Local sockets
Date Thu, 23 May 2002 04:01:45 GMT

Hello --

According to the API posted in

Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:50:07 -0800
From: Aaron Bannert <aaron@clove.org>
Message-ID: <20020111115006.K1529@clove.org>

(which is the last mention I can find in the dev@apr.apache.org archives),
the apr_spipe_t looks _great_ for parent-child IPC, but is in no way meant
to serve the same function that local sockets serve.  Instead, it seems to
replace/augment pipe(...), not socket(AF_LOCAL, SOCK_STREAM, 0).  There is
no way I can see to get one of the apr_spipe_t's returned from
apr_spipe_create accessible in another process, save for a fork/exec.  As
I mentioned, the application I'm re-writing does NOT communicate with
children, but rather, with entirely unrelated processes.

If apr_spipe_t has been extended to include this sort of functionality,
could the API be posted again?



On Wed, 22 May 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:

> Aaron is actually in the middle of creating a stream pipe API for APR.
> This will use Unix Domain Sockets on Unix, and pipes on Windows.  While
> APR requires Unix Domain Sockets, they must be done the right way.
> Ryan
> ----------------------------------------------
> Ryan Bloom                  rbb@covalent.net
> 645 Howard St.              rbb@apache.org
> San Francisco, CA
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@apache.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:29 PM
> > To: Karsten Huneycutt
> > Cc: dev@apr.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Local sockets
> >
> > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 05:49:39PM -0400, Karsten Huneycutt wrote:
> > > I hereby get down on my knees beg for support for this type of
> socket.
> > > If it is the lack of time to code it that is holding it up, I'll
> gladly
> > > take a stab at implementing it. I haven't played much with the
> internals
> > > of the code, only the headers with the intent of using the library,
> but
> > > I'm more than willing to learn if it means I can make my application
> > > even more able to wash its hands of platform-specific complexity.
> >
> > I agree.  I think we should have support for Unix domain sockets
> > and return APR_ENOTIMPL on those platforms without it.  I know
> > I've posted patches before that do this.  You'd have to search
> > the archives to find them (don't have MsgId's handy, sorry).
> >
> > IIRC, the rest of the group was dead-set against this.  Perhaps the
> > fact that more people are interested will sway them.  -- justin

Karsten Huneycutt                  A casual stroll through a lunatic
kph@duke.edu                          asylum shows that faith does not
http://www.duke.edu/~kph                 prove anything  --Nietzsche

View raw message