RE: bidirectional named pipe?

From: Miller, Brendan (Brendan.Miller@Dialogic.com)
Date: Fri Feb 02 2001 - 23:55:41 EST

  • Next message: newsreader@mediaone.net: "Re: did 2.4 messed up lilo?"

    Many thanks to all who have suggested to use UNIX domain sockets. That was
    my first thought--I just didn't know how to preserve the existing named
    interface. And yes, I have consulted several "decent" UNIX programming
    books which have led me to the likelihood that what I want to do cannot be
    done under Linux. A shame, really, even if it is a travestible, abominable
    way to do it.

    The common, named pipe interface was a way to maintain compatibility with
    legacy code of previous versions that are already out in the field. If I
    change the architecture now, folks porting from UnixWare to Linux (for
    example) will have to change their applications (maybe--I haven't fully
    analyzed whether I can change the underlying behavior without affecting our
    API) in order to use Linux.

    I am aware that the current design may not be the most efficient, or even
    the most portable, but I was hoping to maintain it for compatibility sake.
    If someone wants to tell me how to do it, great. If not, I'll assume it
    can't be done and start reworking everything to use socket() or
    socketpair().

    Thanks all,

    Brendan

    Please cc: me on all replies.
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 03 2001 - 00:00:36 EST