From: Richard Dawe Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: why isn't the FSEXT hook implemented for dup in 2.03? Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 19:58:48 +0000 Organization: Customer of Planet Online Lines: 30 Message-ID: <38BAD378.23E5093@bigfoot.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-117.medroxyprogest.dialup.pol.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk 951768560 21597 62.136.88.245 (28 Feb 2000 20:09:20 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 2000 20:09:20 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse AT theplanet DOT net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586) X-Accept-Language: de,fr To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Hello. Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, Ken Yap wrote: > > The problem is the WATT-32 dup needs to be called to do the right > > thing for a socket dup > > What is ``the right thing for a socket dup''? > > I'm asking because I think most (if not all) of what needs to be done > is already done by the existing functionality if you simply call dup. I'm only guessing here, based on my experience of libsocket and my brief look at Watt-32, but I guess it would need to manipulate its internal data structures somehow. IIRC Watt-32 has special handling of duplicated sockets. Its dup handler would need to set a flag indicating this. So, dup() doesn't do everything that Watt-32 needs it to do. libsocket would need a special dup() handler, but there are so many problems trying to duplicate socket file descriptors between DOS boxes that it's probably not worth the hassle. Bye, -- Richard Dawe richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/