Re: [Libevent-users] inet_ntop and inet_pton

[Jeroen Habraken <vexocide@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 8 February 2011 19:32, Nick Mathewson <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Jeroen Habraken <vexocide@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On lines 1499 and 1500 in evutil.c from libevent-2.0.10-stable I've
>> found the following:
>>
>> #define USE_INTERNAL_NTOP
>> #define USE_INTERNAL_PTON
>>
>> which leads to the built-in inet_ntop and inet_pton never being used.
>> Why are these defined?
>
> I'm not sure I remember; they have been there since the first
> ntop/pton patch went in over 2 years ago. ÂMy *guess* would be that
> the goal was to get consistent behavior, since not all ntop/pton
> implementations behave the same way with all inputs. Â(That is, some
> pton implementatinos are a bit lax on what they consider to be an
> erroneous IPv6 address, and some ntop implementations will format the
> same IPv6 address differently from one another.)
>
> Is this causing problems for somebody?
>
> --
> Nick
> ***********************************************************************
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> unsubscribe libevent-users  Âin the body.
>

Problems with sscanf in my environment (I still have figure out
exactly what and why) turned this up. However it seemed trivial to
patch in OpenBSD's version of inet_pton
(http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/net/inet_pton.c)
and that works fine.

Jeroen
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe libevent-users    in the body.