[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: named vs 2.5.64-mm5
So, the SO_BSDCOMPAT messages are in all
likelihood unrelated to the problems I'm seeing
with bind-9.2.1 under 2.5.6x-recent kernels...

I guess I'll have to turn up the debugging on
bind and see if anything unusual pops up -


David S. Miller wrote:

>On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 11:31, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>The changelog has:
>># --------------------------------------------
>># 03/03/08 1.1083
>># --------------------------------------------
>>Maybe James can tell us what is going on here.
>>We should at least place a cap on the number of times that message
>>is printed.
>Feel free to send a patch for that.
>SO_BSDCOMPAT has had ZERO side effects since 2.0.x, and it's been
>thus scheduled to be removed for years. It was merely a binary
>state passed in and out of the kernel to the user and had no effect
>on socket behavior at all.
>Any application still referencing this ancient thing either expects
>some kind of different behavior from setting SO_BSDCOMPAT non-zero,
>or really doesn't rely on anything at all.
>Since SO_BSDCOMPAT has had zero side effects for 5 or so years, this
>means that the safe change is to remove all references to SO_BSDCOMPAT
>that exist in any application.
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to
>More majordomo info at
>Please read the FAQ at

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.074 / U:5.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site