On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 05:29:16PM +0200, Marc Dequènes wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > NI_MAXHOST really is a better thing to use there, so this looks good.
>
> Yes, this is not a Hurd-specific patch at all, this would probably have
> caused problems on other systems.
>
> Thanks for the review :-).
So, does the attached patch work for you?
Kurt
--- ntp-4.2.2.orig/libisc/net.c
+++ ntp-4.2.2/libisc/net.c
@@ -206,7 +206,6 @@
RUNTIME_CHECK(isc_once_do(&once_ipv6only,
try_ipv6only) == ISC_R_SUCCESS);
}
-#endif /* IPV6_V6ONLY */
static void
try_ipv6pktinfo(void) {
@@ -257,6 +256,7 @@
try_ipv6pktinfo) == ISC_R_SUCCESS);
}
#endif /* WANT_IPV6 */
+#endif /* ISC_PLATFORM_HAVEIPV6 */
isc_result_t
isc_net_probe_ipv6only(void) {
--- ntp-4.2.2.orig/ntpd/ntp_intres.c
+++ ntp-4.2.2/ntpd/ntp_intres.c
@@ -524,10 +524,10 @@
msyslog(LOG_INFO, "findhostaddr: Resolving %s>",
stoa(&entry->peer_store));
#endif
- entry->ce_name = emalloc(MAXHOSTNAMELEN);
+ entry->ce_name = emalloc(NI_MAXHOST);
error = getnameinfo((const struct sockaddr *)&entry->peer_store,
SOCKLEN(&entry->peer_store),
- (char *)&entry->ce_name, MAXHOSTNAMELEN,
+ (char *)&entry->ce_name, NI_MAXHOST,
NULL, 0, 0);
}
#ifdef DEBUG
