Re: [PATCH] Fix use of sockaddr_in

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Philipp Stephani <address@hidden> writes:

> +                    case AF_INET:
> +                      port = ((struct sockaddr_in6 *) (struct sockaddr *) 
> &sa1)->sin6_port;
> +                      has_port = true;
> +                      break;
> +                    case AF_INET6:
> +                      port = ((struct sockaddr_in *) (struct sockaddr *) 
> &sa1)->sin_port;
> +                      has_port = true;

Aren't these two cases in reverse?  If it's AF_INET6, it's an in6
struct, not the other way around.

Not that it matters, since (as Eli said) the sizes of the first elements
in the structs are identical...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no