Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> writes:
> On 6/2/09, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> We've had problems before with userland headers not being in sync
>> with what the kernel knows.
> Well, we could just test in configure perhaps?
The single most common way to get into that kind of trouble is to
compile on machine A then install the executables on machine B with
a different kernel. So a configure test wouldn't give me any warm
feeling at all.
A feature that is exercised via setsockopt is probably fairly safe,
since you can check for failure of the setsockopt call and then do
it the old way. MSG_NOSIGNAL is a recv() flag, no? The question
is whether you could expect that the recv() would fail if it had
any unrecognized flags. Not sure if I trust that. SO_NOSIGPIPE
seems safer.
regards, tom lane