Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:32715 comp.unix.sysv386:4908
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ira.uka.de!fauern!NewsServ!!roell
From: roell@informatik.tu-muenchen.de (Thomas Roell)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Help with SCO X11R4 and TCPCONN ?
Message-ID: <1991Feb14.171414.746@newsserv.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
Date: 14 Feb 91 17:14:14 GMT
References: <1991Feb13.213108.24482@mips2.cr.bull.com>
Sender: news@newsserv.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
Organization: Inst. fuer Informatik, Technische Univ. Muenchen, West Germany
Lines: 19
In-Reply-To: macdonal@mips2.cr.bull.com's message of 13 Feb 91 21:31:08 GMT

>   The only thing I can think of is that EWOULDBLOCK is not
>   defined properly, but I'am not quite sure what he ment about
>   "When you compile with sco and TCPCONN you must leave
>   EWOULDBLOCK alone because that is what SCO sockets will return."
>   Any help will be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in advance.

The answer is *very* simpel: 

AT&T redefined EWOULDBLOCK & ERANGE for use with STREAMS to EAGAIN & EMSGSIZE.
This simply fails for SCO's TCP/IP. All you have to be prepared for both
sets of return-values.

- Thomas

--
_______________________________________________________________________________
E-Mail (domain):	 roell@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
UUCP (if above fails):   roell@tumult.{uucp | informatik.tu-muenchen.de}
famous last words: "diskspace - the final frontier..."