Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 01:00:05 -0400 From: cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Getting MAC address within C/C++-program in Windows2000 Message-ID: <20020912050005.GA12275@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <01b001c259ba$601d3070$a66496d4 AT 5at8s8cqeex4qhi> <005b01c259c1$a9538b20$a352a518 AT samsystem> <016601c25a1d$f85078d0$ea6296d4 AT 5at8s8cqeex4qhi> <010901c25a18$240d6dd0$a352a518 AT samsystem> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <010901c25a18$240d6dd0$a352a518@samsystem> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 09:52:04PM -0700, Samuel wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Alex Vinokur" >To: "Cygwin Mailing List" >Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:33 PM >Subject: Re: Getting MAC address within C/C++-program in Windows2000 > >>My attempt to get MAC Address for an Ethernet Adapter has failed. See >http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=al5grb%241n9l0s%241%40ID-79865.news.dfn >cis.de > >All I know is that I copied and pasted the code and made very few >changes (if any) cahnges and it seems to work for me. I don't know how >much it matters that it is a Windows program without any CygWin but >hopefully you can convert to CygWin as needed. I forget what utilities >exist for determining MAC address but I think there are some so you can >use one to verify if the program is malfunctioning. Is there some reason why you all are ignoring Corinna's message on how to do this via Cygwin itself? Theoretically, we've already done the hard part. I have always found this a particularly odd thing about mailing lists and, particularly, about this mailing list. Someone asks "How do I do X?" Someone else reponds "You do Y" and someone else responds "I don't know, but maybe do Q" Then the discussion careens around trying to figure out how to make Q work, while ignoring the potentially definitive "Y" answer. It's entirely possible that there is a problem with Cygwin's interface but I really don't understand why the focus shifted to using Windows mechanisms when a potential actual cygwin solution exists. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/