garrett@udel.EDU (Joel Garrett) (12/04/87)
Hello again, Thanks for the info that you all sent me about translating CBREAK mode into HP-UX. Well, now with that problem out of the way, I've got another question. The code that I am trying to port makes use of a full duplex socket stream According the HP-UX docs, the only socket support we have is for internet- style sockets, whereas we need to have a socket which supports the AF_UNIX type (used for stuff like pipes and interprocess communications according to the BSD docs). Am I at a dead end without having to generate a lot of new code (ie re-write the bugger) or is there anything that will give me the equivalent of this? Thanks in advance, Joel arpa: garrett@udel.edu or: garrett@udel-ccm.arpa
jin@hplabsz.UUCP (12/04/87)
In article <772@louie.udel.EDU> garrett@udel.EDU (Joel Garrett) writes: >The code that I am trying to port makes use of a full duplex socket stream >According the HP-UX docs, the only socket support we have is for internet- >style sockets, whereas we need to have a socket which supports the AF_UNIX >type (used for stuff like pipes and interprocess communications according >to the BSD docs). Am I at a dead end without having to generate a lot of >new code (ie re-write the bugger) or is there anything that will give me >the equivalent of this? We don't currently have AF_UNIX sockets, but is it really that much code to convert it to AF_INET sockets? The only change would be to the initial connection code. ...tai
daveb@llama.rtech.UUCP (Dave Brower) (12/08/87)
In article <1157@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM> jin@hplabsz.UUCP (Tai Jin) writes: >In article <772@louie.udel.EDU> garrett@udel.EDU (Joel Garrett) writes: >>The code that I am trying to port makes use of a full duplex socket stream >>According the HP-UX docs, the only socket support we have is for internet- >>style sockets, whereas we need to have a socket which supports the AF_UNIX >>type (used for stuff like pipes and interprocess communications according >>to the BSD docs). Am I at a dead end without having to generate a lot of >>new code (ie re-write the bugger) or is there anything that will give me >>the equivalent of this? > >We don't currently have AF_UNIX sockets, but is it really that much code >to convert it to AF_INET sockets? The only change would be to the initial >connection code. > > ...tai INET domain sockets are typically much slower than UNIX domain sockets. UNIX domain sockets are not generally available on hybrid systems, and are reputed to be buggy as heck in the best case. On System V, unless you are addicted to socket semantics, you can use FIFO's pretty easily. Don't know if you can select() on a FIFO on HPUX though... -dB "I don't care what you say, as long as you spell my name right." {amdahl, cbosgd, mtxinu, ptsfa, sun}!rtech!daveb daveb@rtech.uucp
rdg@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Rob Gardner) (12/09/87)
> you are addicted to socket semantics, you can use FIFO's pretty easily. > Don't know if you can select() on a FIFO on HPUX though... You most certainly can do a select() on a FIFO on HPUX. No problem. ____________________________________________________ \ \ \ \ / / / / \ \ \ \ / / / / \ \ \ \==========R-A-A-B===========/ / / / \ \ \ \ / / / / \ \ \ \ / / / / ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Rob Gardner {ihnp4!hpfcla,hplabs!hpfcdc}!rdg Hewlett Packard or rdg%hpfcdc@hplabs.hp.com Fort Collins, Colorado 303-229-2048 80525-9599