Re: Passing sockets with "givedescriptor()" (across user profiles) -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Passing sockets with "givedescriptor()" (across user profiles)
From: "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 12:49:46 -0800
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 2/26/21 12:40 PM, Scott Klement wrote:

The last time I discussed this with an IBMer, the recommendation was to stop using givedescriptor/takedescriptor. Off the top of my head, I don't remember their reasoning.

They recommend using the sendmsg/recvmsg routines as a replacement.

Uh, exactly how does one use sendmsg/recvmsg to pass a socket from one job to another? Looking at sendmsg() in the aforementioned 22-year-old manual, I see that it apparently can pass a descriptor through a socket (although it doesn't say anything about how), but how does that help me, given that there isn't a socket connecting the two jobs (the only socket is the one connecting to the client)?

--
JHHL

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Passing sockets with "givedescriptor()" (across user profiles) , Kevin Bucknum

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.