Re: datagram vs stream sockets

[manu%netbsd.org@localhost (Emmanuel Dreyfus)]

der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> wrote:

> Which protocol family?  PF_LOCAL?  Someone mentioned UDP, but PF_INET
> strikes me as unlikely for this application.

Yes, it uses PF_LOCAL.

> You're smart enough that I find it notable you apparently don't even
> consider having the filesystem treat a stream socket as the octet
> stream it really is, not necessarily reflecting record boundaries on
> write to record boundaries on read.  Is there some reason this is out
> of the question?  It really strikes me as the Right Thing.

That require intrusive patching of libfuse (and FUSE filesystems that
directly open /dev/fuse), something that I would like to avoid for the
sake of maintenability. 

What I do not grasp yet is how it works without bugs on Linux: character
devices are not datagram sockets. Perhaps the kernel just checks that a
frame is consumed before sending a new one? Unfortunately I am unaware
of such a posibility with stream sockets.

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu%netbsd.org@localhost