[OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm] Fix UDP binding in Windows sockets (#563)

 

Changed sqSocketListenOnPortBacklogSizeInterface() to match general behavior of Unix socket version. Previously was always incorrectly binding UDP sockets to INADDR_ANY instead of the specified IPv4 address.

---

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563

Commit Summary

• Changed sqSocketListenOnPortBacklogSizeInterface() to match general

File Changes

• M platforms/win32/plugins/SocketPlugin/sqWin32NewNet.c (2)

Patch Links:

• https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563.patch
• https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563.diff

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>

 

Merged #563 into Cog.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#event-4686337072", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#event-4686337072", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>

 

Hi John, thanks for this. Which specific tests are affected by this change?

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832350744", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832350744", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>

 

No tests present in 5.3 broke. I could redo my test code and stick it in the socket tests, if you could point me to how to get it integrated. I caught it while working on Rbt to make it handler multiple network interfaces more sanely.

This prior behavior was normal up until Sept. 2003, when there was discussion on the squeak-l about it and Ian updated the Unix code to do the right thing. Since then there have been some complaints, but apparently no one who had the expertise or time to fix it was available. Is there anyone at present who has the nominal responsibility for the socket plugin and the various platform modules? I spent a lot of time reading the code and have some questions about the whys of the design.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832406913", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832406913", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>

 

John, look at SocketTest in a 5.3 or preferably a trunk image. You can then submit a new version of the Tests package to inbox or just mail me a change set etc. We can discuss more on squeak-dev to eg make you a committer etc.

Discuss the design issues on vm-dev or squeak-dev. I’m curious about the design too and would love to get rid of the threads and the asynchronous name lookup, replaced by a proper threaded FFI.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832429226", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832429226", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>

 

I noted this issue along with some others back in 2014 but never got my questions answered: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/2014-December/017383.html
SocketPlugin's platform code needs some review/cleanup.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

<script type="application/ld+json">[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832728987", "url": "https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/563#issuecomment-832728987", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]</script>